PDA

View Full Version : Should we pay tithes to be bless and free?



Pages : [1] 2

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 12:43 AM
I do believe in tithes myself ; and we teach this doctrine time after time.

I just got through reading this link about tithes and it gave me second thoughts.

http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=161

So many people say it is not in the new testament and can`t be found , plus it is the old law and we are not under the OT , but the 10% is finished paid at the cross through Jesus .

What is you opinion or belief on this??

I might be confussed on this but I do stand on what the bible say`s here :Mal:3:8: Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
Mal:3:9: Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
Mal:3:10: Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
Mal:3:11: And I will rebuke the devourer for your s

So when I don`t pay my tithes I feel condemned and curse, and my prayers are stoped and not answered, and I am not blessed and can`t bless others.
A matter of fact some people in my church say they are not even allowed to seat with me because I am a thief if I don`t pay tithes, or any one else who doesn`t pay tithes can`t preach at our church even as a pastor or leader.

I need help on this because i HAVE A big heritance will coming from my father death, so I want to pay tithes on this to my church but have a hard time trying to pay over $40.000 for tithes to my church in peace.
My wife has a greater problem and is in disagreement and lack of faith in giving tithes so it is a problem in my family as one in agreement in giving tithes.

if someone has more proof on this we need all the proof we can get.


God Bless

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 01:12 AM
Why do you keep rehasing this subject over and over ad nauseam?

Jesus is our tithe.

The tithe has been paid!

Crow
June 28th, 2004, 01:31 AM
c.moore--

Personally, I equate paying tithes with baptism. Are we, as Christians, chained to works and the Law? No.

That does not mean that we don't support our churches. It means that we should support our churches as we relate to each other. Not by a set of rules, but out of the Spirit working through us, guiding us.

Tithes were a requirement of the circumcision. You and I are dead to the Law. If you observe the way funds are gathered by the apostles after the crucifixion, it was done by freewill offerings. And that is how we should support our churches.

Crow
June 28th, 2004, 01:37 AM
c.moore--

If you pay tithes, you might as well add in that baptism and circumcision and adherence to the dietary laws are necessary--all are of the circumcision and the Law.

Certainly we should support our churches, but through freewill offerings, not by clinging to a Law that is not applicable to those of us dead to the Law by grace.

We should support our churches because of the Spirit working through us.

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by Crow

c.moore--

If you pay tithes, you might as well add in that baptism and circumcision and adherence to the dietary laws is necessary--all are of the circumcision and the Law.

Certainly we should support our churches, but through freewill offerings, not by clinging to a Law that is not applicable to those of us dead to the Law by grace.

We should support our churches because of the Spirit working through us.

What :crow: said :thumb:

...and the fact that Jesus is our tithe; the tithe has been paid!

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 04:23 AM
Why do Charismatic churches teach this , and claim those who don´t pay it is cursed , and they are thieves?

Also they say it is not a law it is a way of showing your love to God , and´the tithes belong to God in the first place.

Why people fall under condemnation when the tithes are not payed??

Lighthouse
June 28th, 2004, 04:40 AM
Thank you. I needed this.

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

Why do Charismatic churches teach this , and claim those who don´t pay it is cursed , and they are thieves?


Because the heirarchy of the "Charismatic" churches are in the business of being blessed by those whom they choose to control through their false teachings.


Also they say it is not a law it is a way of showing your love to God , and´the tithes belong to God in the first place.

If ever there were an evil form of manipulation, what you just said is it!

btw... Just so you know, "manipulation" is just another word for witchcraft
Why people fall under condemnation when the tithes are not payed?? Because the people in the charismatic chrurches (for the most part), are under the mind control of those whom they listen to, rather than the Holy Spirit. However, it is their own fault, because the majority of people in the charismatic churches are there because they want something from God, and are not there for God.

BillyBob
June 28th, 2004, 07:49 AM
I once talked with a guy who was a Pentecostal. He walked me through his house and showed me what God had 'bought' for him. He said that it was his reward and if I wanted to improve my monetary status, I had to go to church with him and learn more. I went to his church on my own....once. It was a trip! The 'Pastor' talked mainly about money, tithes and rewards from God. The people were whipped into a frenzy, stood up and started chanting and caterwauling. It sounded just like an 'Indian War Party' preparing for battle.

I got the hell out of there as fast as I could.

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 08:59 AM
Tithing under the law was 22.5% and not 10 % So the idea of a tithe in todays churches is a figment of someones imagination. It is just designed to get you to give a certain amount so that they can keep there books easer. Using the law to put someone on a guilt trip so he will give is coercion.

The giving to get heresy is just that heresy. What is it that God the Father will not give to his children that He would give if they tithe. God loves His children. I have three grand children that I love. I buy thinks and feed them because of who they are not for what I require from them. I am sure the blessings of God are based on my relationship to Him. Not what he requires of me. I am His child.

My grand children don't have anything I need so why require it of them? Where would they get it anyway? What do they have that they did not receive from me. What do I have that I did not receive? My grandchildren do give me things but they give them to me because they love me because I first loved them I give things to God because I love Him . I love Him because He first loved me.

Did you ever see a child's face when you make a fuse over some little effort they made to make you happy. I'm sure the Father is the same way. The children's effort was not given by demand but because of love. They just had a bad case of I wont too and it is the same with God.

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

Why do you keep rehasing this subject over and over ad nauseam?

Jesus is our tithe.

The tithe has been paid!


Paul taught systematic and proportionate giving in 2 Cor. 8 and 9

Jesus did not pay our tithe. Only we can give to the ministry of the Gospel. If we quit giving, there would be no missions, leadership, churches, Bibles, etc.

Giving more than a tip to God reflects stewardship and His Lordship in our lives. It is an act of worship and an important step of obedience. The principles of giving and the law were not rescinded in the NT. We should still honor our parents, not steal, not lust, etc. The moral law of God was not dissolved on the cross. Much of the ceremonial law for Jews is not applicable for us.

The tithe predated the Law (Genesis= Melchizedek). It is a solid guideline for all believers. It is not a legalism, but something we do cheerfully with a motive of love for God and others. We do not give to get (wrong motive). It is not a formula, but an expression of love and obedience.

One of my profs did a doctoral thesis on tithing. The evidence and final conclusion pointed to the reasonableness of tithing as a guideline for NT believers.

God is not broke. He does not need our money. There is no use giving to Him (we are not giving to man) if we do not have the right motive. It is unfortunate that ministry is hindered by the selfishness of believers. Let us not be like the churches that need bingos and bake sales to keep afloat (non-tithers), while cults like Mormons (tithers) grow and thrive.

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Paul taught systematic and proportionate giving in 2 Cor.



Verse, please.
Jesus did not pay our tithe The portion, sanctifies the whole. Jesus is our tithe. Maybe not yours, however.


Only we can give to the ministry of the Gospel. If we quit giving, there would be no missions, leadership, churches, Bibles, etc. Nobody said anything about not giving.
Giving more than a tip to God reflects stewardship and His Lordship in our lives Verse, please.


It is an act of worship and an important step of obedience. Verse, please.


The principles of giving and the law were not rescinded in the NT. So when was the last time you sacrificed a goat for your sins?


The moral law of God was not dissolved on the cross. Much of the ceremonial law for Jews is not applicable for us. You have no biblical support for such a stupid comment.
The tithe predated the Law (Genesis= Melchizedek). It is a solid guideline for all believers.

The only other time "tithe" is referred to is the incident where Abraham paid a tenth of his goods to Melchizedek. However that was a one time gift Abraham gave of his own free will as a public act of thanksgiving for a military victory, not as an act of obedience to a command of God. Furthermore, the fact that something was practiced before the Law does not make it a permanent command of God. If we use Abraham as an example for tithing then we need to follow him in other areas as well, such as circumcision and animal sacrifice. It's funny that those last two areas are rarely mentioned along with tithing. (Gen. 14, 15 & 16) The real point of this incident as quoted in the New Testament is to show the supremacy of our priesthood in Christ represented by Melchizedek over the priesthood of Levi, a descendent of Abraham. (Hebrews 7:1-10)

...Bob George

It is not a legalism A phrase commonly used by legalists.

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 09:47 AM
But what does the New Testament say about tithes

Not a lot. In fact the only references to tithing in the New Testament are Matthew 23:23, Luke 11:42, Luke 18:12 and Hebrew 7: 5 - 9.



1. Who was the first person to tithe?
2. Who told Abraham to tithe?
3. What is the relationship between tihes and offering?
4. What does the law have to do with tithing?
5. What were tithes used for in the Old Testament?
6. Do we still have these needs in the body of Christ today?
7. What do 'first fruits' and 'tithes' have in common?
8. What does the New Testament say about tithing?
9. Should a Christian give money to the work of God?
10. How much should a Christian constantly give to God's work?
11. What blessings are there to giving money to God's work?
12. Should we give less or more than they did in the Old Testament?
13. If we give ten percent of our income, could we, even with God's grace, still manage to survive on the rest?
14. Is God's work worth ten percent?
15. Can you explain Luke 16: 13 - 16 ?
16. Why do some Christians find it hard to give to God's work

also here are some question we should think about or that we are left with to study and know.


God Bless

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

I do believe in tithes myself ; and we teach this doctrine time after time.

I just got through reading this link about tithes and it gave me second thoughts.

http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=161


The churches represented by this link deny the Deity of Christ. They quote Unitarian websites to deny this and the Trinity. They may have connections with the old Way International (cult).

There are better academic sources about tithing from a Christian perspective than the ramblings of a non-Christian group.

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

The churches represented by this link deny the Deity of Christ. They quote Unitarian websites to deny this and the Trinity. They may have connections with the old Way International (cult).

There are better academic sources about tithing from a Christian perspective than the ramblings of a non-Christian group.

Yeah, you could try the cult that godrulz is a member!

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

The churches represented by this link deny the Deity of Christ. They quote Unitarian websites to deny this and the Trinity. They may have connections with the old Way International (cult).

There are better academic sources about tithing from a Christian perspective than the ramblings of a non-Christian group.

Do you know some good links on this subject it is very important for me and my family.

I am at the same time asking God to show me in truth the understanding of giving tithes in a deeper level without being under a law or legalism doctrine.


God Bless

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

Yeah, you could try the cult that godrulz is a member!

:confused: what cult does he belong too??:think: :confused:

Is he catholic, Mormon, JHW, SDA or Muslim or Budda?

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 10:08 AM
2 Cor. 8 and 9 PRINCIPLES of giving (e.g. not under compulsion, systematic, etc.)

I Cor. 16:2 "On the first day of the week (systematic), each one of you should set aside a sum of money (systematic) in keeping with his income (proportionate), saving it up (purposeful)..."

If you put together ALL the relevant verses on tithing and properly understand the atonement, the Law, principles vs legalisms, etc....tithing comes out as a reasonable guideline for the explicit principle of giving.

Check you heart and mind...this is between the individual conscience and God.

"Not how much of MY money will I give to GOD, BUT, how much of GOD'S money will I keep for myself?" - missionary statesman Oswald J. Smith

It is the Lord's tithe and my offerings. Alms are the last category and go beyond this. Generosity honors God; greed dishonors God. Seek first and invest in His kingdom more than this life (Mt. 6).

Acts 20:35 "It is more blessed to give than to receive."

Legalistic questions about tithing (gross vs net; does it have to be 10%, etc.) miss the stewardship and heart of the matter.

If you do not tithe as a minimum to God, what do you use as a guideline? Do you drop $1 in the plate (this is not proportionate to income...remember the little lady Jesus commended and the Pharisees that He rebuked?) at Christmas only (this is not systematic= beginning of the week).

There is an academic issue here: what does the Bible teach on giving by way of principles?

There is a discipleship issue here: Do I have the selfish mentality of the pagan culture, or do I honor God even with my time, talents, AND treasures?

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 10:12 AM
Should we pay tithes to be bless and free? c. moore, what makes you think that a child of God is not blessed and free? What makes you think that we need to pay tithes in order to be blessed and free? What blessings and what freedoms should we expect to gain by titheing that is not ours at present?:confused:

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

:confused: what cult does he belong too??:think: :confused:

Is he catholic, Mormon, JHW, SDA or Muslim or Budda?

Evangelical, Protestant Christian.

Conservative Pentecostal (in belief and experience). (equivalent of U.S. Assemblies of God)

Would agree with most statements of faith (essentials) by traditional Christian groups like Baptist, Anglican, Lutheran. Agree with great creeds of the Christian church.

Do not deny the Deity of Christ, etc. like cults do.


Sozo, what church, cult, religion do you identify with and is the understanding of giving principles a salvific issue (hint: NO!).

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by elected4ever

Should we pay tithes to be bless and free? c. moore, what makes you think that a child of God is not blessed and free? What makes you think that we need to pay tithes in order to be blessed and free? What blessings and what freedoms should we expect to gain by titheing that is not ours at present?:confused:


Ephesians 1:3 "...who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with EVERY spiritual blessing IN CHRIST."

We do not give to get (wrong motive), but give as an expression of love, worship, obedience, stewardship to meet practical needs, (love relationship) etc. (principles support this...sozo, the Bible is not a systematic book of proof texts).

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

(principles support this...sozo, the Bible is not a systematic book of proof texts).

"See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ."

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 10:46 AM
godrulz, did you read post #7

Crow
June 28th, 2004, 11:01 AM
c.moore

My best advice is do what the Spirit leads you to do, and take into account your responsibilities as a Christian man. I do not believe that you can "buy" prosperity or blessings from God by giving, as some evangelists suggest. That is an evil "teaching" which has no place in the Body of Christ.

You have a responsibility to take care of your family. In 1 Timothy, we read:

8 If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

This is worded very strongly. God has delegated the suport of your wife and children to you. Spending money to provide for their necessities is not stealing from God, even if it takes your last cent.

You also have a responsibility to your church, but I do not believe that it is tithing.

You alone among people know how much income it takes to feed and house your family, how likely or unlikely you are to have health problems that would decrease or end your earnings, and a host of other situations that would impact your finances. I would say look at the whole financial picture, with an eye to the responsibility that God has given you to provide for your family and the needs of your church.

Here's a link (http://www.straightistheway.com/economics/churchgiving.html) to a site that has a good essay on economics from a Biblical standpoint. I hope this is of help.

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 11:08 AM
godrulz, I seem to detect a legalest wrapped in sheep clothing. I ask you, what blessing are we to expect if we tithe and what blessing are we to be denyed if we do not tithe? I have known rich people that did not tithe and pore people that did and guess what the rich remained rich and the poor remained poor. Is God therefore unjust? Are the poor in some manner cursed by God?

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by elected4ever

godrulz, I seem to detect a legalest wrapped in sheep clothing. I ask you, what blessing are we to expect if we tithe and what blessing are we to be denyed if we do not tithe? I have known rich people that did not tithe and pore people that did and guess what the rich remained rich and the poor remained poor. Is God therefore unjust? Are the poor in some manner cursed by God?

Tithing is not a formula/technique that produces blessings or curses. It is not legalistic to worship, love and obey God in relationship. Is going to church legalism? Is giving legalism? Is praying legalism. They may or may not be depending on motive.

Phil. 4:10 ff is in a context of finances. Paul learned to be content in any circumstance, rich or poor. Why? "I can do everything through him who gives me strength." This does not mean he can leap tall buildings like superman. In context, it means he relies on God whether rich or poor. He meets our needs, not our greeds. Paul is thanking the Philippians for their generous support. The Bible probably talks more about money and stewardship than heaven and hell. There are everlasting priniciples in Scripture than should not be dismissed as legalism. Find the principles and stop looking for ways to be cheap with the things of the Kingdom. I have tithed for over 20 years and still struggle with debt, etc. I do not regret this expression of love and worship and helping advance the gospel despite not getting 100 fold in this life (this is a misinterpretation of the principle...we do not give to get $).

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

I have tithed for over 20 years and still struggle with debt, etc. I did not assume that you give to get from God, but there is no biblical support for tithing under the New Covenant.

Everyone, who attends a church, should give to support the church and it's ministries, the same as I would give to my neighbor who has need.

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 11:51 AM
Tithing may very will be right for you. I do not object to tithing. What I do object to is bringing a person under a charge of poor stewardship if he does not. That is legalism. Such arguments have been used by the church for years to extort money from there members. I frankly would like to be like JC Penney and be able to give 90% and keep the 10% but for me to do so would be poor stewardship. In many cases for an individual to tithe would be poor stewardship. These people that cannot should not be placed under the burden of false guilt because of the greed of the church.

c.moore
June 28th, 2004, 04:10 PM
Should also the tithes go only to my currect church or can I give it in other Godly work like missinary works or to the homeless, and etc?

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

Should also the tithes go only to my currect church or can I give it in other Godly work like missinary works or to the homeless, and etc?

I would say that this may be the perfect timing for the first smilie survivor...

:hammer:

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 04:18 PM
What difference does it make? Do You keep tabs on all your charitable giving? You don't give after 10% when you have the ability to help someone in need? You use your so called tithe for tax purposes and you don't give if it is not reimbursed by the government? Why should such a thing concern you?

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by elected4ever

Tithing may very will be right for you. I do not object to tithing. What I do object to is bringing a person under a charge of poor stewardship if he does not. That is legalism. Such arguments have been used by the church for years to extort money from there members. I frankly would like to be like JC Penney and be able to give 90% and keep the 10% but for me to do so would be poor stewardship. In many cases for an individual to tithe would be poor stewardship. These people that cannot should not be placed under the burden of false guilt because of the greed of the church.

Our motive should be to give as unto God. The church will be accountable for how they steward the funds. I do not perceive that Bible-based churches are greedy. They are often generous with other ministries as well as attending to their own needs.


1+1+1=3 in reality (this represents Mormon tritheism).

Do you mean 1x1x1=1 as a limited analogy of the Trinity?

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

Should also the tithes go only to my currect church or can I give it in other Godly work like missinary works or to the homeless, and etc?

The Malachi 'storehouse' principle could be used as a guideline. Support your local church first, since this is where you are fed. TV ministries that encourage the tithe to be given to them are undermining the local church, God's main instrument for growing His family and army.

Sozo
June 28th, 2004, 05:21 PM
Don't sugarcoat it, godrulz! Either tithing is a command of God that requires strict obedience or there is punishment.

or

It is not a command, and God works in the hearts of each individual to give as he sees need.

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 05:32 PM
godrulz
Do you mean 1x1x1=1 as a limited analogy of the Trinity?

One God the Father plus One God the Son plus One God the Holy Spirit equals one God. There is no devision of the three and all exist in perfect harmony with each other. This is foreign to human thinking and defies Human logic. Nothing like this exist on earth that can demonstrate this principle. Our futile attempts to explain this logical has raised more questions than they have answered. I just discern the truth and accept it. I will know when I get home as we all will and our questions will all be answered.

godrulz
June 28th, 2004, 05:38 PM
God is a compound unity. 3 in 1 and 1 in 3. I just think 1x1x1=1 is a better illustration since it shows how 3 things can be 1.

elected4ever
June 28th, 2004, 05:42 PM
We are strangers in a foreign land. While we are here we see great need and the Father has given each of us the ability to minister in some way. It is normal for a citizen of a foreign country to use that which he has to improve the lives of those around him and to demonstrate the goodness of his homeland.

c.moore
June 29th, 2004, 07:00 PM
But is Malachi for us Christians today or was the giving only to the Israelites?

Was the tithes for only the priest to give??

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

But is Malachi for us Christians today or was the giving only to the Israelites?

Was the tithes for only the priest to give??

We must interpret Malachi in context for the correct understanding. What did it mean to the original hearers? Check a commentary like Keil-Delitzsch.

If we apply it to the church, it would be by way of application and principle only. What does it mean to us (is there an application for all believers?) This is reasonable, but not the primary interpretation/application.

If the law required 10% +, then why is everyone trying to give less under grace? It seems to me we would at least give what the law required since we have the abundance and grace of Christ in our lives i.e. perhaps we should exceed what the law required. I think there is a reflection on the heart if everyone is trying to give the bare minimum to God. It is not the amount as much as the motive and heart that God values.

Sozo
June 29th, 2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

We must interpret Malachi in context for the correct understanding. What did it mean to the original hearers? Check a commentary like Keil-Delitzsch.

If we apply it to the church, it would be by way of application and principle only. What does it mean to us (is there an application for all believers?) This is reasonable, but not the primary interpretation/application.

If the law required 10% +, then why is everyone trying to give less under grace? It seems to me we would at least give what the law required since we have the abundance and grace of Christ in our lives i.e. perhaps we should exceed what the law required. I think there is a reflection on the heart if everyone is trying to give the bare minimum to God. It is not the amount as much as the motive and heart that God values.

Do you just make things up as you go?

:nono:

Turbo
June 29th, 2004, 08:00 PM
Jesus identified the tithe as part of the law, and a lesser matter at that:

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Matthew 23:23

cravescheese
June 29th, 2004, 08:31 PM
But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.

Pay tithes to yourself if you want.

You as a priest do not need to pay tithes to any other priests.

These full time pastors that preach tithing need to get a job and support themselves.

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

Do you just make things up as you go?

:nono:

I suppose, but it is based on years of study. These are merely my reasonable opinions that have support from other believers or teachers.

What do you not understand about these basic hermeneutical principle?

i) Interpret Scripture in light of the historical, contextual, grammatical, theological context of the original audience (revelation was given centuries ago, not for the 21 st century). We must find the one intended meaning for the original audience.

e.g. Corinthians was written to first century believers in Corinth. It is issue literature. What did it mean to them?

ii) Once we know the one correct interpretation of a passage, we find the eternal principles and make applications for believers of all generations. There may be more than one application.

Sozo, you still have not identified what religion or denomination you identify with. Perhaps you are the subjective standard of truth?

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 09:25 PM
Originally posted by Turbo

Jesus identified the tithe as part of the law, and a lesser matter at that:

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Matthew 23:23

He still commended tithing, but their motive and lack in other areas was rebuked. Jesus did not rescind tithing or murder or adultery laws, but expanded on them (heart/motive vs externals).

Turbo
June 29th, 2004, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

He still commended tithing, but their motive and lack in other areas was rebuked. Jesus did not rescind tithing or murder or adultery laws, but expanded on them (heart/motive vs externals). (Actually, I think it would be more accurate to say He clarified them.)

He preached obedience to the whole Law, for He ministered to Israel. But the Body of Christ is not under the law. We are not required to tithe any more than we are require to circumcise or keep the sabbath.

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.

Pay tithes to yourself if you want.

You as a priest do not need to pay tithes to any other priests.

These full time pastors that preach tithing need to get a job and support themselves.

Nice twisting of Scripture. We pay tithes to God, not to priests and certainly not to ourselves (let's all rationalize selfless giving away and use God's $ to buy toys for ourselves?!).

Pastors that preach tithing and stewardship are trying to be faithful to Scripture as they understand it. They will be accountable for what they teach. Many leaders are bi-vocational. The Pauline principle is that leaders are worthy of support (do not muzzle the ox). He voluntarily gave up his right to support so no one would question his motives. Many cults do not pay their front line leaders (hierarchy is paid). This is not as effective as full-time equippers.

Sozo
June 29th, 2004, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

I suppose, but it is based on years of study. These are merely my reasonable opinions that have support from other believers or teachers.

What do you not understand about these basic hermeneutical principle?

i) Interpret Scripture in light of the historical, contextual, grammatical, theological context of the original audience (revelation was given centuries ago, not for the 21 st century). We must find the one intended meaning for the original audience.

e.g. Corinthians was written to first century believers in Corinth. It is issue literature. What did it mean to them?

ii) Once we know the one correct interpretation of a passage, we find the eternal principles and make applications for believers of all generations. There may be more than one application.

Sozo, you still have not identified what religion or denomination you identify with. Perhaps you are the subjective standard of truth?

Again, you cannot water down the Law! Either tithing is a command of God that cannot go unpunished unless you follow it perfectly...

or

We are to give freely without compulsion as we see need.


I am a bible believing, spirit filled, child of the living God. I occasionally attend a Bible Baptist Church, and unfortunately spent 10 years in a Charismatic Assembly which I left 12 years ago. I managed an evangelical radio station, and have been teaching home bible studies for 15 years.

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 09:45 PM
Sorry about your negative charismatic experience. These groups include everything from conservative evangelicals to the lunatic fringe. I would not throw the baby out with the bath water, but search Scripture for an understanding of the person and work of the Holy Spirit.

We do not keep the Law in order to be saved. I am merely suggesting that the tithe is a reasonable guideline or starting point for our giving. People who subjectively give what they feel, tend to give a token amount hindering ministry. The stats on believer's level of giving show that most give very little to God (in contrast to the Mormon empire).

cravescheese
June 29th, 2004, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Nice twisting of Scripture. We pay tithes to God, not to priests and certainly not to ourselves (let's all rationalize selfless giving away and use God's $ to buy toys for ourselves?!).


How is that a twist. Are we not priests? Tithes were paid to support the priesthood. And I am not saying we should not be giving, but paying for these lazy CEO's of Church-corporations to have nice homes, cushy lifestyles and go on book signing tours, is not paying tithes to God. Don't kid yourself.

You want to righetously manage your money. Do what Jesus said. Sell all you have and give your money to the poor. Jesus didn't tell the man to give 10% of his money to a 501.3(c).


Originally posted by godrulz
Pastors that preach tithing and stewardship are trying to be faithful to Scripture as they understand it. They will be accountable for what they teach. Many leaders are bi-vocational. The Pauline principle is that leaders are worthy of support (do not muzzle the ox). He voluntarily gave up his right to support so no one would question his motives. Many cults do not pay their front line leaders (hierarchy is paid). This is not as effective as full-time equippers.

Leaders are worthy of support, but they shouldn't be a burden on their congregations if they have means to support themselves.

In other words, if they have a skill and can earn money to support themselves, they should. The church can take a collection to make up a difference if there is a valid reason for it.

I see many pastors that are fat, obviously gluttonous sloths who would be far better off earning a living instead of leeching off their hardworking brothers and sisters.

Sozo
June 29th, 2004, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by godrulz


We do not keep the Law in order to be saved. I am merely suggesting that the tithe is a reasonable guideline or starting point for our giving. People who subjectively give what they feel, tend to give a token amount hindering ministry. The stats on believer's level of giving show that most give very little to God (in contrast to the Mormon empire).

But, you can't build doctrine around "reasonable guidelines"... ugh!

Those who do, are practicing Nicolaitanism... which is establishing control over people without any substantive support.

Teaching Christians to tithe has absolutely no biblical support.

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 09:55 PM
The legitimate support of godly, hard-working leaders should not be confused with the poor work ethic of a few. Our principles of giving should be fleshed out from Scripture and not our anecdotal observations of the hypocrites.

Unbelievers reject Christianity based on poor examples of Christians. They are still without excuse since the Word of God and person of Christ are the issues they must wrestle with.

Rejecting biblical principles is not excused by pointing fingers at those whom God will accurately judge.

I have no more patience for leeches than you do.

Early leaders gave themselves to prayer and the Word. Serving the flock full time is a legit occupation, but it must be done with integrity and accountability.

Sozo
June 29th, 2004, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Unbelievers reject Christianity based on poor examples of Christians. If that is what you think, then I sincerely believe that you are in a cult.

godrulz
June 29th, 2004, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

If that is what you think, then I sincerely believe that you are in a cult.

This is an arrogant, ignorant comment. Your credibility has taken another hit.

SOME unbelievers reject Christianity with the EXCUSE that there are hypocrites in the church. This is basic apologetics and easily refuted. The issue is the truth and one's relationship with/to Christ, not the imperfections of man.

What cult teaches that unbelievers reject Christ based on poor examples of Christians? NONE.

Do you always jump to conclusions and judge people's relationship with God based on misunderstanding statements out of context with no knowledge of their beliefs or heart?

I would not be surprised if you attend a narrow, legalistic church that thinks it is the only one with understanding. I have no basis for this other than your quirky comments.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 03:09 AM
It never fails to amaze me that the churches that push the law of tithing the most, almost always seem to be the nicer than God, don't judge anyone churches.

In other words, they throw out the law except the one that pays their salaries.

Makes sense actually, that way you can have the largest possible flock to fleece, since you have alienated no one...homos, adulterers, your all welcome, just ante up when the collection plate comes around.

Anyone else see a pattern amongst these kinds of churches?

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 10:05 AM
One should be open to the possibility that tithing is a principle (not a legalistic law) in the Word of God.

One should be careful of crass skepticism about the motives of churches that demonstrate excellent stewardship and are accountable with the money of God's people (channel it to ministry and advancing the kingdom). There may be abuse by some leaders, ministries, churches. God will judge them (and we can too if there is evidence).

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

One should be open to the possibility that tithing is a principle (not a legalistic law) in the Word of God.


One should be open to the possibility that tithing is a tradition of men (not required by God) which are condemned by the Word of God.


Originally posted by godrulz
One should be careful of crass skepticism about the motives of churches that demonstrate excellent stewardship and are accountable with the money of God's people (channel it to ministry and advancing the kingdom). There may be abuse by some leaders, ministries, churches. God will judge them (and we can to if there is evidence).

One should be careful of willful ignorance about the workings of the enemy wolves in sheeps clothing that God's Word proclaims will and have come amongst God's people. There is abuse by many leaders, ministries and churches. God will judge them and so must we. He that is spiritual judges all things.

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

This is an arrogant, ignorant comment. Your credibility has taken another hit.

My credibility is with God, and you have ZERO to say about it.

As far as my comment appearing to be ignorant, it is indeed you that are ignorant as to why people reject Christ. YOU are not the example, Christ is! We testify concerning Him, and not ourselves. We are witnesses of who He is, what He has done, and the message concening Him!


SOME unbelievers reject Christianity with the EXCUSE that there are hypocrites in the church. Have you ever read Romans Chapter 2? It is not the example of the behavior of "Christians" that keeps the unbelievers opposed to God, but the fact that "Christians" teach that they are an example because of their behavior. That is what a cult does, and that is what YOU claimed.


Do you always jump to conclusions and judge people's relationship with God based on misunderstanding statements out of context with no knowledge of their beliefs or heart? It is a rather short step to conclude that anyone who teaches tithing as applicable today is either in a cult, or attending a church that is foreign to the message of Christ. It is not hard to spot a counterfeit when you are so familiar with the real thing.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 02:48 PM
The majority of evangelical churches support tithing as a guideline. They do not tie it to salvation. The alternative is bingos and bake sales and garage sales, etc. to fund ministry.

Why the aversion to giving systematically and proportionately of our income? Greed? Selfishness? This is a principle established early for the people of God. There is no reason to think there are no principles (especially doing less under grace than the law) for NT believers. I would expect a billionaire should give more than 10% and a person on welfare no more? This does not have to be binding or a compulsion. If we encourage people to support a missionary, this does not mean we are under the Law.


Cheese: what church, religion, denomination do you identity with? Do they have any standards or guidelines on belief and practice? Let each decide based on the Word and their relationship with God.

I would rather give significantly as unto God than tip Him and blow the rest on my needs and wants.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

The majority of evangelical churches support tithing as a guideline. They do not tie it to salvation. The alternative is bingos and bake sales and garage sales, etc. to fund ministry.



Broad is the road that leads to destruction.


Originally posted by godrulz


Why the aversion to giving systematically and proportionately of our income? Greed? Selfishness? This is a principle established early for the people of God. There is no reason to think there are no principles (especially doing less under grace than the law) for NT believers. I would expect a billionaire should give more than 10% and a person on welfare no more? This does not have to be binding or a compulsion. If we encourage people to support a missionary, this does not mean we are under the Law.



Why the non-aversion to it? How about simple mathmatics.

If every family gave 10% of their income then, it would take 9 families to give one pastors family the average income of the 9 families (assuming he was not to tithe himself, 10 if he was to tithe)

So now you have these mega churches and denoms. You have one head pastor and maybe 5 or 6 paid assistant pastors. They would only need 70 or so families to support them.

But they aren't satisfied with that. They want to hve big buildings with leases and mortgages. They need a christian bookstore to sell sugar coated precious moments cliche-theology plaques to hang in your bathroom. They need to always collect more and more. There is never enough. Talk about GREED and SELFISHNESS.

Where do you find authorization in the NT for the church to own any property? Where does it say they had buildings, schools or anything like what the multi-level-christians proclaim that God wants the church to have?

Open your eyes, most of these so called pastors are far more concerned with fleecing the sheep than feeding the sheep.


Originally posted by godrulz

Cheese: what church, religion, denomination do you identity with? Do they have any standards or guidelines on belief and practice? Let each decide based on the Word and their relationship with God.

I would rather give significantly as unto God than tip Him and blow the rest on my needs and wants.

I identify as a Christian, a follower of Christ not any man made "demon-ination" or religion. There is only one church.
I currently attend a church that is a Calvary chapel (Chuck Smith)affiliate, but trust me, I don't agree with all the ear-tickling sermons that they preach.

Now answer me:


How are you giving to God? Jesus didn't say to give money to the apostles and let them administer it, He said give it to the poor.

If you want to give, great, but don't be fooled you aren't giving it to God. You would be much wiser to give it to the poor directly, at least you would know they got it.

Of course then you might not get a tax deduction....

Lovejoy
June 30th, 2004, 04:18 PM
"Ear-tickling" huh? 2Timothy 4:3 is one of my favorite verses, or at least one of the ones that I take most to heart. It is a very clear warning about what we have to deal with.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Lovejoy

"Ear-tickling" huh? 2Timothy 4:3 is one of my favorite verses, or at least one of the ones that I take most to heart. It is a very clear warning about what we have to deal with.

I am not happy when the ear-tickling occurs, but I am not naive enough or willfully ignorant enough to believe or convince myself that it doesn't happen.

I like the parable of the 10 virgins. Half were unprepared and had no oil so they didn't get to come in to the wedding. I think that is well taught, but I think it is often neglected that they all fell asleep (became drowsy)

If the virgins represent churches (denoms) as many teach, I think it is interesting that they all fell asleep.

In other words, no denom/church is perfect so to think yours is, is self centered and foolish.

Lovejoy
June 30th, 2004, 06:30 PM
An excellent perspective, and one that I hold as well. I attend a Foursquare church, because I respect the pastor, but my studies are my own.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by Lovejoy

An excellent perspective, and one that I hold as well. I attend a Foursquare church, because I respect the pastor, but my studies are my own.

Right-on!

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Broad is the road that leads to destruction.



Why the non-aversion to it? How about simple mathmatics.

If every family gave 10% of their income then, it would take 9 families to give one pastors family the average income of the 9 families (assuming he was not to tithe himself, 10 if he was to tithe)

So now you have these mega churches and denoms. You have one head pastor and maybe 5 or 6 paid assistant pastors. They would only need 70 or so families to support them.

But they aren't satisfied with that. They want to hve big buildings with leases and mortgages. They need a christian bookstore to sell sugar coated precious moments cliche-theology plaques to hang in your bathroom. They need to always collect more and more. There is never enough. Talk about GREED and SELFISHNESS.

Where do you find authorization in the NT for the church to own any property? Where does it say they had buildings, schools or anything like what the multi-level-christians proclaim that God wants the church to have?

Open your eyes, most of these so called pastors are far more concerned with fleecing the sheep than feeding the sheep.



I identify as a Christian, a follower of Christ not any man made "demon-ination" or religion. There is only one church.
I currently attend a church that is a Calvary chapel (Chuck Smith)affiliate, but trust me, I don't agree with all the ear-tickling sermons that they preach.

Now answer me:


How are you giving to God? Jesus didn't say to give money to the apostles and let them administer it, He said give it to the poor.

If you want to give, great, but don't be fooled you aren't giving it to God. You would be much wiser to give it to the poor directly, at least you would know they got it.

Of course then you might not get a tax deduction....

POTD :first:

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

POTD :first:

I am honored!

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 07:22 PM
Do you suggest that churches meet in a park? We would freeze here in Canada. Culturally, it is not unreasonable to meet in buildings and have a physical presence in the community. Scripture would not prohibit this. If it is not explicit, then neither are cars and airplanes. The temple or house churches were not imaginary. Different cultures or eras can have different expressions of the Church. Extravagant buildings are unnecessary and poor stewardship. Much of North American Christianity is off track, but this does not mean that all of it is.

Our church gives away much of what it takes in. It gives to missions, colleges, the poor, etc. There is more accountability and efficiency for a local church to administer funds (confidential needs, etc.) than individuals randomly giving with no wisdom or accountability (individuals can give, but larger projects like building third world churches often require pooling of funds, ETC.).

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Do you suggest that churches meet in a park? We would freeze here in Canada. Culturally, it is not unreasonable to meet in buildings and have a physical presence in the community. Scripture would not prohibit this. If it is not explicit, then neither are cars and airplanes. The temple or house churches were not imaginary. Different cultures or eras can have different expressions of the Church. Extravagant buildings are unnecessary and poor stewardship. Much of North American Christianity is off track, but this does not mean that all of it is.

Our church gives away much of what it takes in. It gives to missions, colleges, the poor, etc. There is more accountability and efficiency for a local church to administer funds (confidential needs, etc.) than individuals randomly giving with no wisdom or accountability (individuals can give, but larger projects like building third world churches often require pooling of funds, ETC.).

In other words... we should not only tithe, but we should tithe to YOUR church

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Do you suggest that churches meet in a park? We would freeze here in Canada. Culturally, it is not unreasonable to meet in buildings and have a physical presence in the community. Scripture would not prohibit this. If it is not explicit, then neither are cars and airplanes. The temple or house churches were not imaginary. Different cultures or eras can have different expressions of the Church. Extravagant buildings are unnecessary and poor stewardship. Much of North American Christianity is off track, but this does not mean that all of it is.


I suggested nothing of the sort. Culturally, as a Christian your "culture" is not determined by where you live or in what era, but by what you believe. Christian culture should be based on the Word of God. Meeting in a public building such as Solomon's Portico in the Temple is far different than owning a building. Since we have no temple, other public buildings seem appropriate, libraries etc.

Meeting in private houses or inns (rented spaces?) seems to be in line with the scripture. You can have a physical presence in the community without creating "Church-corporations" that own property and continually have fundraisers for building projects. If you outgrow a private house or rentable spaces then plant a new church instead of creating 19,000 member mega churches where the pastor cannot possibly know his sheep and the sheep know their pastor.

Please give me a scriptural example of the church becoming a corporate entity so it could purchase property.


Originally posted by godrulz

Our church gives away much of what it takes in. It gives to missions, colleges, the poor, etc. There is more accountability and efficiency for a local church to administer funds (confidential needs, etc.) than individuals randomly giving with no wisdom or accountability (individuals can give, but larger projects like building third world churches often require pooling of funds, ETC.).

Who says there is more accountability? Are you saying you are not accountable to yourself? Your reasoning is circular. Lets raise money to build properties for third world churches so they can raise money for other building projects. Where does this end?

The primary example of the NT is house churches. It doesn't take much "pooling of funds" to buy some bibles and send them to a Christian convert in a poor country so he can start a church in his home. You seem to be obsessed with having buildings.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

In other words... we should not only tithe, but we should tithe to YOUR church


Are you serious? Support the local church you are fed at. I was merely giving a positive example of the church.

Maybe some of you should search the Scriptures to develop a more cogent ecclesiology. The church is God's primary instrument in the world. We are part of the Body of Christ with local expressions. It is the family and army of God.

Start here: "...Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her..." Eph. 5:25

I would be slower to slander and judge the church and its leaders in a stereotypical way. It the the Lord of the Church who accurately commends and rebukes it (Revelation 2 and 3= local churches were commended and rebuked by the Head and Cornerstone).

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Are you serious? Support the local church you are fed at. I was merely giving a positive example of the church.

Maybe some of you should search the Scriptures to develop a more cogent ecclesiology. The church is God's primary instrument in the world. We are part of the Body of Christ with local expressions. It is the family and army of God.

Start here: "...Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her..." Eph. 5:25

I would be slower to slander and judge the church and its leaders in a stereotypical way. It the the Lord of the Church who accurately commends and rebukes it (Revelation 2 and 3= local churches were commended and rebuked by the Head and Cornerstone).

Were they not rebuked for leaving their first love?

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Are you serious? Support the local church you are fed at. I was merely giving a positive example of the church.

Maybe some of you should search the Scriptures to develop a more cogent ecclesiology. The church is God's primary instrument in the world. We are part of the Body of Christ with local expressions. It is the family and army of God.

Start here: "...Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her..." Eph. 5:25

I would be slower to slander and judge the church and its leaders in a stereotypical way. It the the Lord of the Church who accurately commends and rebukes it (Revelation 2 and 3= local churches were commended and rebuked by the Head and Cornerstone).



YOU are the one who criticized the majority of the churches in America for not operating in the same fashion as your own.

In any case, the church is not a building, or an organization. It is people.

You have lost your argument in support of tithing, and this discussion has become a pointless devotion to organized religion, and not to Christ.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 07:51 PM
Having buildings is one model of meeting. I started a church that met in schools, office buildings, etc. This would not have precluded eventual land or building purchase. This does not have to become a corporate empire sucking the funds out of people.

Is it wrong for believers to OWN homes or is it more spiritual to rent? Perhaps both are valid? Get a grip.

Ownership leads to mortgage burning which leads to NO payments or rent. Ultimately this is an appreciating asset that results in better stewardship. In our culture, a physical presence in the community can be a lighthouse and place of hope. Leaving buildings for nominal churches gives them credibility in our culture and raises cultic suspicion for the little huddles that are underground. Home cell groups are great, but it is hard to fit a large church in a home. There is a place for large celebration and small cells. Mega-churches can have mega-impact.

It is simplistic and short sighted to say renting is the only valid model. Your wooden literalism would not allow us to live in the 21st century. Apply principles since not every modern contingency is dealt with in Scripture.

The above is reasonable and not a pathological obsession with buildings. Your knowledge of ecclesiology and church history is lacking.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

YOU are the one who criticized the majority of the churches in America for not operating in the same fashion as your own.

In any case, the church is not a building, or an organization. It is people.

You have lost your argument in support of tithing, and this discussion has become a pointless devotion to organized religion, and not to Christ.

The church is people that may or may not meet in buildings. There is a distinction between the church universal and the local church (both are valid). Thousands of churches operate as my church does (accountability, efficiency, stewardship, glorifying to God, etc.). Your focus is on the minority or nominal churches that are not alive.

Tithing can flow out of devotion to Christ or bondage to organized religion. It is both/and, not either/or. This is similar to what day of worship we choose (Pauline argument). If someone gives 10% and another 30% and another 1%...it is between them and God. All days of the week are as unto God (not just Sunday or Sabbath). Likewise, all giving may be either as unto God or in a merely religious manner.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Were they not rebuked for leaving their first love?

Only 1/7 churches had that indictment. Each local church has different strengths or weaknesses. What is your point? He did not negate the validity of the ministry of the Church. He desired to exhort and edify believers to greater Christlikeness.

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

If someone gives 10% and another 30% and another 1%...it is between them and God. All days of the week are as unto God (not just Sunday or Sabbath). Likewise, all giving may be either as unto God or in a merely religious manner.

YOU ARE MAKING THIS UP IN YOUR OWN MIND!!!!



Are you demon possessed? Becuase no one can be as completely dense as you are.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Having buildings is one model of meeting. I started a church that met in schools, office buildings, etc. This would not have precluded eventual land or building purchase. This does not have to become a corporate empire sucking the funds out of people.


Yes it is one model. It is not a model we have an example of. We do have examples of small home fellowhips and churches meeting in public places where unbelievers congregate.

Here would be a good place to meet. Meet at your local Jehovah's witness kingdom hall. That way you could witness to and convert them. If they kick you out, oh well. Or meet at a synagogue, buddhist temple, mormon temple or hindu ashram.

Just as the early church would go to the synagogues as a witness to the jews. Makes sense...thats where the unbelievers are!

When asked why he robbed banks a famous bankrobber said "Thats where the money is"

Once you have your own building "sanctuary" you lose out on the opportunity to engage the unbelievers. Hindus usually aren't going to come to your church. If you go to their places they will have to deal with you.


Originally posted by godrulz
Is it wrong for believers to OWN homes or is it more spiritual to rent? Perhaps both are valid? Get a grip.


Please don't attribute words to me. Where did I say any such thing? You grip is the one that seems loose.


Originally posted by godrulz

Ownership leads to mortgage burning which leads to NO payments or rent. Ultimately this is an appreciating asset that results in better stewardship. In our culture, a physical presence in the community can be a lighthouse and place of hope. Leaving buildings for nominal churches gives them credibility in our culture and raises cultic suspicion for the little huddles that are underground. Home cell groups are great, but it is hard to fit a large church in a home. There is a place for large celebration and small cells. Mega-churches can have mega-impact.


Where does it say the church is to have assets? Does store up your treasure in heaven ring a bell to you? You can most easily have a physical presence in the community by going out into the community, not hiding in comfy pews in a sanctuary. Why does a church have to or want to become large? Once you get big how can the pastor and the members really get to know eachother and have true fellowship? Mega churches tend to be places where mega amounts of carnal christians can hide from their responsibility to go out into the world and be salt and light. It is easier to be lost in a large crowd than a small one.


Originally posted by godrulz
It is simplistic and short sighted to say renting is the only valid model. Your wooden literalism would not allow us to live in the 21st century. Apply principles since not every modern contingency is dealt with in Scripture.

The above is reasonable and not a pathological obsession with buildings. Your knowledge of ecclesiology and church history is lacking.


I didn't say renting is the only valid model. You are again attributing words to me that I did not say. Wooden literalism or following God's Holy Word? Let's see, back in the NT early church days..did they have concepts of public and private property? YES. Did they have concepts of renting spaces like at inns? YES Did they have private homes? YES.

What modern contingency relative to this discussion does the bible not deal with?

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Only 1/7 churches had that indictment. Each local church has different strengths or weaknesses. What is your point? He did not negate the validity of the ministry of the Church. He desired to exhort and edify believers to greater Christlikeness.

Maybe leaving their first love was an indictment of leaving their love for spreading the Gospel to the world by hiding in a sanctuary in a mega church.

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Here would be a good place to meet. Meet at your local Jehovah's witness kingdom hall. That way you could witness to and convert them. If they kick you out, oh well. Or meet at a synagogue, buddhist temple, mormon temple or hindu ashram.

We use to have our bible study in the local tavern. We would put some tables together, pull out our bibles, and order a couple of pitchers and some appetizers!

Is it okay with you, godrulz, if we "tithe" to the local pub?

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

We use to have our bible study in the local tavern. We would put some tables together, pull out our bibles, and order a couple of pitchers and some appetizers!

Is it okay with you, godrulz, if we "tithe" to the local pub?

Assuming you are not being facetious, think of what a witness that would be.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

YOU are the one who criticized the majority of the churches in America for not operating in the same fashion as your own.

In any case, the church is not a building, or an organization. It is people.



I think that is the real problem, people are all about buildings and top-down hierarchies. This goes back at least to the tower of Babel. It seems to be a big part of the sin nature.


Originally posted by Sozo
You have lost your argument in support of tithing, and this discussion has become a pointless devotion to organized religion, and not to Christ.

You have hit the nail on the head.

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Tithing can flow out of devotion to Christ or bondage to organized religion. It is both/and, not either/or. This is similar to what day of worship we choose (Pauline argument). If someone gives 10% and another 30% and another 1%...it is between them and God. All days of the week are as unto God (not just Sunday or Sabbath). Likewise, all giving may be either as unto God or in a merely religious manner.

Then why call it tithing? Doesn't tithing literally mean a tithe or a tenth?

Why not call it give all, some, or none? Why misuse the OT laws regarding giving a tenth to support the priesthood to mean give all some or none to support some building project?

Why not admit that the laws of tithing a tenth of your increase (we can discuss if wages that many families can barely survive on are "increase" separately) do not apply to the church?

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Assuming you are not being facetious, think of what a witness that would be.

I was being honest!

I was a DJ in the night-club scene throughout the "Disco" era, and after I became a Christian it was the best place to find people whom I knew and share what Christ has done for them.

Brent2
June 30th, 2004, 08:57 PM
If you have a problem paying tithes on a large sum of money, you should pray the sum of money would become a smaller amount.....

Brent

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Brent2

If you have a problem paying tithes on a large sum of money, you should pray the sum of money would become a smaller amount.....

Brent

It's funny what stupid things some people will say, uh Brent?

elected4ever
June 30th, 2004, 09:38 PM
Brent2
If you have a problem paying tithes on a large sum of money, you should pray the sum of money would become a smaller amount.....

efe ---------:shocked: :noid: :kookoo: :darwinsm: :bang: :vomit:

Sozo


It's funny what stupid things some people will say, uh Brent?

e4e -----:up: :box: :sozo2:

Brent2
June 30th, 2004, 09:46 PM
Hey.... I'm just trying to help out. (hehehehe)

Brent

elected4ever
June 30th, 2004, 09:54 PM
Brent2
Hey.... I'm just trying to help out.

e4e ---- It would help if you made sense. Its like saying the poor shall inherit the earth so quit you job. :freak:

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

I was being honest!

I was a DJ in the night-club scene throughout the "Disco" era, and after I became a Christian it was the best place to find people whom I knew and share what Christ has done for them.

I apologize for posting something that appeared to question your honesty. I don't doubt your honesty. When I first read your post I thought you said, what if we met in a tavern, not that we did meet in one. My mistake.

BTW, I think that is one of the coolest things I have heard in a while.

I am tired of Ivory Tower Christianity. Jesus went to the sinners not the saved. Jesus would have a bible study anywhere and everywhere.

The Son of God owned no property and had no where to lay His head.

Yet His ministry was the most effective. No buildings, or fundraisers required. I don't know of Jesus ever taking a collection.

Since this was about tithing, we should discuss the tithe-feast. You never hear the tithe-preachers talk about that.

Enyart is correct to bring it up.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

YOU ARE MAKING THIS UP IN YOUR OWN MIND!!!!



Are you demon possessed? Becuase no one can be as completely dense as you are.

Sorry if I am not clear. The Sabbath question was addressed by Paul to those who were bickering over the old and new covenant. Some issues must be based on principles, since Scripture does not give prescriptions for every issue. Within God's moral law is an area of freedom and conscience on some issues (weaker, stronger brother, etc.).

Do you not think it slanderous (a sin) to say someone is cultic and demon possessed based on a few personal thoughts? Do you think the Spirit is impressed that you call Him an evil spirit indwelling a child of God?

sozo lacks credibility and integrity....this is not slanderous...

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Yes it is one model. It is not a model we have an example of. We do have examples of small home fellowhips and churches meeting in public places where unbelievers congregate.

Here would be a good place to meet. Meet at your local Jehovah's witness kingdom hall. That way you could witness to and convert them. If they kick you out, oh well. Or meet at a synagogue, buddhist temple, mormon temple or hindu ashram.

Just as the early church would go to the synagogues as a witness to the jews. Makes sense...thats where the unbelievers are!

When asked why he robbed banks a famous bankrobber said "Thats where the money is"

Once you have your own building "sanctuary" you lose out on the opportunity to engage the unbelievers. Hindus usually aren't going to come to your church. If you go to their places they will have to deal with you.



Please don't attribute words to me. Where did I say any such thing? You grip is the one that seems loose.



Where does it say the church is to have assets? Does store up your treasure in heaven ring a bell to you? You can most easily have a physical presence in the community by going out into the community, not hiding in comfy pews in a sanctuary. Why does a church have to or want to become large? Once you get big how can the pastor and the members really get to know eachother and have true fellowship? Mega churches tend to be places where mega amounts of carnal christians can hide from their responsibility to go out into the world and be salt and light. It is easier to be lost in a large crowd than a small one.




I didn't say renting is the only valid model. You are again attributing words to me that I did not say. Wooden literalism or following God's Holy Word? Let's see, back in the NT early church days..did they have concepts of public and private property? YES. Did they have concepts of renting spaces like at inns? YES Did they have private homes? YES.

What modern contingency relative to this discussion does the bible not deal with?

Who said unbelievers are supposed to come to church for an evangelistic message?

The church is a gathering for worship, instruction (edification/equipping), fellowship, equipping for evangelism, and service. We are to GO to the world and form relationships with people in our community (GOspel; Great Commission= Go ye). If an unbeliever comes to church, so be it. The church is primarily the family and army of God, not an evangelistic center (secondary, alternate model of ministry for some services).

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Maybe leaving their first love was an indictment of leaving their love for spreading the Gospel to the world by hiding in a sanctuary in a mega church.

Nice eisegesis (reading meaning into text that is not primary interpretation based on context, etc.). Try exegeting the real meaning and situation before making your applications (what did it mean to them (interpret)? What does it mean to us (apply)?)

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Do you not think it slanderous (a sin) to say someone is cultic and demon possessed based on a few personal thoughts?

Nope... and neither did Jesus or Paul.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

We use to have our bible study in the local tavern. We would put some tables together, pull out our bibles, and order a couple of pitchers and some appetizers!

Is it okay with you, godrulz, if we "tithe" to the local pub?

I commend you for being where the people are. This is 'church'. It would lack wisdom and integrity to tithe to the pub, since funds could be used to advance sin (strippers, drunkeness, gambling, etc.). The Malachi principle could have application where we give our $. There is no Old or New Testament practice for giving to ungodly institutions. I will assume you are being sarcastic.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Then why call it tithing? Doesn't tithing literally mean a tithe or a tenth?

Why not call it give all, some, or none? Why misuse the OT laws regarding giving a tenth to support the priesthood to mean give all some or none to support some building project?

Why not admit that the laws of tithing a tenth of your increase (we can discuss if wages that many families can barely survive on are "increase" separately) do not apply to the church?

I would rather be faithful, obedient and generous than robbing God of a reasonable fruit of my time and labors. If poor people tithe, God will be faithful to meet their needs. This is not giving to get, but submitting to His Lordship and trusting the providential Father-heart.

OK, let's call it a tithe...a reasonable starting point for NT giving. I give net vs gross income...it would be legalistic to argue which is more accurate.

cf. some people feel the Bible condemns drinking alcohol...for them, it may be a sin to drink, while others might have a clear conscience. I believe the Bible teaches moderation and did not forbid alcohol. However, in our culture, other biblical principles could be used for abstinence. This would be a principle of wisdom.

The principle of tithing could be similar. It may not be obvious that NT believers should tithe (or drink or abstain), but you cannot condemn me for using it as a guideline (not explicitly rescinded in the NT) with the motive to obey, worship, love, please God and further the Kingdom.

godrulz
June 30th, 2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

Nope... and neither did Jesus or Paul.

You have neither the wisdom, credibility, authority of Jesus nor Paul. You know a fraction of who I am, yet you make sweeping judgments on things you misunderstand:doh:

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

You have neither the wisdom, credibility, authority of Jesus or Paul. You know a fraction of who I am, yet you make sweeping judgments on things you misunderstand:doh:

Am I "misunderstanding" that you believe and teach that Christians should tithe?

Sozo
June 30th, 2004, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

You have neither the wisdom, credibility, authority of Jesus nor Paul. You know a fraction of who I am, yet you make sweeping judgments on things you misunderstand:doh:

btw... are you judging me as not having wisdom, credibility, or authority?

cravescheese
June 30th, 2004, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Who said unbelievers are supposed to come to church for an evangelistic message?

The church is a gathering for worship, instruction (edification/equipping), fellowship, equipping for evangelism, and service. We are to GO to the world and form relationships with people in our community (GOspel; Great Commission= Go ye). If an unbeliever comes to church, so be it. The church is primarily the family and army of God, not an evangelistic center (secondary, alternate model of ministry for some services).

Interesting...you didn't deal with any of my points and then proceed to try and claim that I said "unbelievers are supposed to come to church for an evangelistic message".

We were talking about the church needing property. Right? The church building as you are discussing it can be a place to have evangelical outreaches. Or are you saying that it can't.

Anyway you are still missing the mark. The church IS NOT THE BUILDING.

We believers are the church. We can meet anywhere at anytime.

The church primarily did four activities according to the book of acts. Fellowship, Studying the Apostles teaching, Breaking of Bread, and Prayer. And they did this in eachothers homes.
Not in mega churches where they barely knew eachother and had phonyship, but at eachothers house where they could really know eachother and have true fellowship.

How much true fellowship happens in large churches? Not much, which is why even the mega-churches will encourage their members to join home fellowships or mini-churches. It is because it is obvious that if you only attend the services at the church building you can just be a face in the crowd where no one really knows who you are.

Sure, you turn around and shake hands and smile when the preacher asks you to, but no one really knows eachother. Hanging out with the brethren and getting to know eachother (fellowship), eating meals together at eachothers houses (breaking bread), studying the Word together (the Apostles teachings) and praying together is how Christian churches should really conduct themselves.

Your list "worship, instruction (edification/equipping), fellowship, equipping for evangelism, and service" is a start but leaves out breaking bread, studying the word together as opposed to being instructed in a one way top-down, sermonistic style and arguably most importantly praying together. I would also question how true the fellowship is especially if it is only one or twice a week for a one hour or so service.

I see it at large churches frequently. The have some elders who will pray with you after the service if you "need prayer" Like who doesn't need prayer? The problem is that praying with someone who doesn't know you is not as effective as praying with someone who you are in true fellowship with. It is also a barrier to many people because they have to go up to the front of the church after the service and may be shy. They might need prayer for something they aren't comfortable talking to a mere acquaintance about.

Bottom line:

Mega churches are essentially big productions where little true fellowship takes place, prayers are likely to be shallow and the breaking of bread consists of a broken piece of matzoh and a thimble of grape juice. Believers can easily be just a face in the crowd and never grow spiritually, but fall away when the world attacks, which it always does.

Do you honestly think that is what the church is supposed to be?

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by godrulz
I would rather be faithful, obedient and generous than robbing God of a reasonable fruit of my time and labors. If poor people tithe, God will be faithful to meet their needs. This is not giving to get, but submitting to His Lordship and trusting the providential Father-heart.



Robbing God? That is ludicrous. According to Jesus, you cannot rob from a strong man let alone God unless you bind him first. It is impossible to steal from God. Submitting to God means doing His will. How is following a law that was intended to support a priest class that no longer exists doing His will?

The veil was torn in two from top to bottom.

Their is no priest class anymore. All believers are priests in a royal priesthood. If you were to claim that tithing was applicable then pay it to the priests. In other words, tithe to yourself.



Originally posted by godrulz
OK, let's call it a tithe...a reasonable starting point for NT giving. I give net vs gross income...it would be legalistic to argue which is more accurate.



It is legalistic to require anyone to tithe at all. Tithing was a LAW to support a priest class that was abolished.


Originally posted by godrulz
cf. some people feel the Bible condemns drinking alcohol...for them, it may be a sin to drink, while others might have a clear conscience. I believe the Bible teaches moderation and did not forbid alcohol. However, in our culture, other biblical principles could be used for abstinence. This would be a principle of wisdom.



I could give a rip about what some people feel. What does the Word say? Do not lean on your own understanding.



Originally posted by godrulz
The principle of tithing could be similar. It may not be obvious that NT believers should tithe (or drink or abstain), but you cannot condemn me for using it as a guideline (not explicitly rescinded in the NT) with the motive to obey, worship, love, please God and further the Kingdom.

Tithing is not a principle. It was a law that was very specific and is no longer applicable. It was rescinded in the NT when all believers became priests. Are you saying that the priests in the OT would tithe? If so to whom? Likewise who are we NT priests to tithe to? Why do you pick just this law to judaize about? Why not the laws regarding mixing threads in fabric? Do you avoid cotton/poly blends?

It sounds to me that you are a materialistic money focused person who has not really studied the bible yourself but repeats whatever the johnny pulpit you listen to spews forth in a sermon.

c.moore
July 1st, 2004, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

We must interpret Malachi in context for the correct understanding. What did it mean to the original hearers? Check a commentary like Keil-Delitzsch.

If we apply it to the church, it would be by way of application and principle only. What does it mean to us (is there an application for all believers?) This is reasonable, but not the primary interpretation/application.

If the law required 10% +, then why is everyone trying to give less under grace? It seems to me we would at least give what the law required since we have the abundance and grace of Christ in our lives i.e. perhaps we should exceed what the law required. I think there is a reflection on the heart if everyone is trying to give the bare minimum to God. It is not the amount as much as the motive and heart that God values.

For some people this is a process to give 10%, and they give maybe 5% now , but everytime they hear about them being disobedient in giving 10% a great wrath of condemnation will fall on them and this will not encourage them to give anything any more.

My wife has a problem with this now and she say she can give because she don`t give in faith or love and is not cheerful about it at this time so what should she do??

Should she give out of legalism, and stress??

c.moore
July 1st, 2004, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Sorry about your negative charismatic experience. These groups include everything from conservative evangelicals to the lunatic fringe. I would not throw the baby out with the bath water, but search Scripture for an understanding of the person and work of the Holy Spirit.

We do not keep the Law in order to be saved. I am merely suggesting that the tithe is a reasonable guideline or starting point for our giving. People who subjectively give what they feel, tend to give a token amount hindering ministry. The stats on believer's level of giving show that most give very little to God (in contrast to the Mormon empire).

This is what I mean , we would like to give but when you are giving a large sum like me 30.000 because of my father will to me, and the church demands that 10% it is hard to do, specially when you know your church waste money and get themselves in big depth because of lack of wisdom.

What should I do here so I can still be bless??

What about the favor of the Lord is that cancelled out also because of the tithes, and what about God Mercy is that also of no effects???:confused:

c.moore
July 1st, 2004, 02:08 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

I was being honest!

I was a DJ in the night-club scene throughout the "Disco" era, and after I became a Christian it was the best place to find people whom I knew and share what Christ has done for them.

I didn`t know you were a DJ also praise the Lord.

You need to read my testamony on my Revival disco for christians and sinners.
You can also watch me spin online on the web site.

freak was many times our guess and speaker, and even have him live casting out demons , and binding , and loosing.

www.revivaldisco.com

c.moore
July 1st, 2004, 02:12 AM
My church preaches if a person don`t pay tithes they are a thief and anyone who if caught being a leader or belong to the gospel team who doesn`t pay tithes is not allowed to be in any office or take part in leadership in any way in our church and some don`t even talk to a person who don`t pay tithes or sit at the same table with a tothes thief.

This is what tithes do in some church and mine.

What do you think about this????

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

This is what I mean , we would like to give but when you are giving a large sum like me 30.000 because of my father will to me, and the church demands that 10% it is hard to do, specially when you know your church waste money and get themselves in big depth because of lack of wisdom.

What should I do here so I can still be bless??

What about the favor of the Lord is that cancelled out also because of the tithes, and what about God Mercy is that also of no effects???:confused:


The money may be a blessing in itself. You can't buy mercy, it is a free gift of God.

I say don't give the church anything, you don't have to. The Lord knows your heart. If you feel you have more than enough to support your family and are out of debt, have savings for an emergency (rainy day), have the kids college fund stocked and have paid off your car, house etc then maybe you have been working really hard and are a good steward and deserve a vacation?

Maybe you were blessed with that money so you could take a cruise around the world? Who knows.

What about your family? A husband takes care of not just his own wife and kids but his whole household. Maybe you have relatives that are struggling? An aunt or uncle who needs some car repairs? A niece or nephew working their way through colllege? Bless them before you bless complete strangers through your church or some para-church ministry.

Pray about it, but don't give it to anyone out of obligation.

If you have yourself and your whole household covered, than I would think about whether God might just want you to enjoy yourself, as in the tithe feast example.

If that doesn't seem right to you, you can invest it and grow the money so you can have more ability to help needy people.

If you want to give some away, I think starting with widows and orphans is a good idea, certainly you will be blessed if you help needy widows and orphans.

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

My church preaches if a person don`t pay tithes they are a thief and anyone who if caught being a leader or belong to the gospel team who doesn`t pay tithes is not allowed to be in any office or take part in leadership in any way in our church and some don`t even talk to a person who don`t pay tithes or sit at the same table with a tothes thief.

This is what tithes do in some church and mine.

What do you think about this????

Jesus said that the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil.

It sounds to me like these people love money and are causing all sorts of evil by falsely accusing people of the invented sin of stealing tithes from God.

I would find another church or start my own.

Brent2
July 1st, 2004, 05:14 AM
elected4ever,
Do you not have any sense of humor?

It was supposed to be a joke.


Brent

elected4ever
July 1st, 2004, 06:37 AM
c.moore My church preaches if a person don`t pay tithes they are a thief and anyone who if caught being a leader or belong to the gospel team who doesn`t pay tithes is not allowed to be in any office or take part in leaders
hip in any way in our church and some don`t even talk to a person who don`t pay tithes or sit at the same table with a tithes thief.

This is what tithes do in some church and mine.

What do you think about this????


e4e ---------- The thief is in the pulpit and those in leadership are facilitators of the theft. It is control by false guilt. You clam to have demons cast out in your church and you cant even discern a thief. Sounds to me like Freak can't discern demons ether. Nothing to brag about in your church.:nono: :kookoo:


Brent2 Do you not have any sense of humor?

It was supposed to be a joke.

e4e ------- I am happy that you were not serious. It was just a poor joke as I have heard that same message from pulpits in a serious fashion as attested to by C-Moore.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Interesting...you didn't deal with any of my points and then proceed to try and claim that I said "unbelievers are supposed to come to church for an evangelistic message".

We were talking about the church needing property. Right? The church building as you are discussing it can be a place to have evangelical outreaches. Or are you saying that it can't.

Anyway you are still missing the mark. The church IS NOT THE BUILDING.

We believers are the church. We can meet anywhere at anytime.

The church primarily did four activities according to the book of acts. Fellowship, Studying the Apostles teaching, Breaking of Bread, and Prayer. And they did this in eachothers homes.
Not in mega churches where they barely knew eachother and had phonyship, but at eachothers house where they could really know eachother and have true fellowship.

How much true fellowship happens in large churches? Not much, which is why even the mega-churches will encourage their members to join home fellowships or mini-churches. It is because it is obvious that if you only attend the services at the church building you can just be a face in the crowd where no one really knows who you are.

Sure, you turn around and shake hands and smile when the preacher asks you to, but no one really knows eachother. Hanging out with the brethren and getting to know eachother (fellowship), eating meals together at eachothers houses (breaking bread), studying the Word together (the Apostles teachings) and praying together is how Christian churches should really conduct themselves.

Your list "worship, instruction (edification/equipping), fellowship, equipping for evangelism, and service" is a start but leaves out breaking bread, studying the word together as opposed to being instructed in a one way top-down, sermonistic style and arguably most importantly praying together. I would also question how true the fellowship is especially if it is only one or twice a week for a one hour or so service.

I see it at large churches frequently. The have some elders who will pray with you after the service if you "need prayer" Like who doesn't need prayer? The problem is that praying with someone who doesn't know you is not as effective as praying with someone who you are in true fellowship with. It is also a barrier to many people because they have to go up to the front of the church after the service and may be shy. They might need prayer for something they aren't comfortable talking to a mere acquaintance about.

Bottom line:

Mega churches are essentially big productions where little true fellowship takes place, prayers are likely to be shallow and the breaking of bread consists of a broken piece of matzoh and a thimble of grape juice. Believers can easily be just a face in the crowd and never grow spiritually, but fall away when the world attacks, which it always does.

Do you honestly think that is what the church is supposed to be?

I concur with much of your assessment and share the same concerns. We need to rethink how we do church. I just do not think we need to swing the pendulum to another extreme and think it more spiritual to not have buildings, etc. This is not the root problem. It is a heart and leadership issue. Let us respond to the principles of the Word and not react against the foibles of the modern church.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

For some people this is a process to give 10%, and they give maybe 5% now , but everytime they hear about them being disobedient in giving 10% a great wrath of condemnation will fall on them and this will not encourage them to give anything any more.

My wife has a problem with this now and she say she can give because she don`t give in faith or love and is not cheerful about it at this time so what should she do??

Should she give out of legalism, and stress??

I appreciate your concerns. We should not give out of duty, fear, legalism, coercion, condemnation, guilt, etc.

We should try to establish a biblical understanding of giving.

I believe tithing is a principle applicable for all believers. I am taking flack for that here. Maybe they should read my profs doctoral thesis on whether tithing is still valid in the NT.

From a pastoral perspective, I would hear the heart and spirit of the Malachi passage. In a materialistic culture, it is liberating to be able to give out of our abundance. God does not need our tithe. To obey is better than sacrifice. Like much of the Christian life, obedience precedes feelings. I would obey Scripture and the Spirit (if you are being convicted from the Word, not from man, about this area) whether I felt great about it or had mixed motives.

There are many anecdotal stories of believers who have started giving systematically and proportionately as unto God. There is blessing for obedience. I cannot afford to give what I do. In my heart, I know it is the right thing for me. It is a tangible way to jettison cheapness and selfishness in my life with the desire to invest in the Kingdom and see it advanced. Where your treasure is, there your heart will be.

Many believers are in bondage to money and live materialistically. We can learn from the rich young ruler who lost salvation since money was his god. Practically, tithing meets needs and loosens the grip of mammon on our lives.

The naysayers arguments do not consider all issues, but too quickly dismiss tithing outright.

I do not condemn others who do not see light in the same way I do. Nor should they condemn me for using it as a guideline. God knows my heart and motives, and I know what He has shown me from the Word. I would be responsible for not living up to the light I have.

billwald
July 1st, 2004, 10:34 AM
There was no "Christian" real estate until Constantine made Christianity the official religion around 300 AD. At that time the Church didn't build churches, they stole pagan temples.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

This is what I mean , we would like to give but when you are giving a large sum like me 30.000 because of my father will to me, and the church demands that 10% it is hard to do, specially when you know your church waste money and get themselves in big depth because of lack of wisdom.

What should I do here so I can still be bless??

What about the favor of the Lord is that cancelled out also because of the tithes, and what about God Mercy is that also of no effects???:confused:

God is a God of love and does not hold a club to us. An inheritance is not earned income any more than a birthday gift of cash is. You do not give to get or to be blessed. I believe you have the freedom to tithe the lump sum or not. I would be inclined to give some of it to a ministry like Gospel for Asia where lives will be transformed forever. I would not feel obligated to 'tithe' on this. If you do give a big amount, I am sure this would please God and be rewarded in eternity. If you do not, I do not think you would be condemned (unless the Spirit is clearly saying to do this).

I also do not tithe on income tax returns like some people do. An income tax refund is an overpayment, not earned income.

See, I am not as legalistic as some think. Perhaps the spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law folks? C.Moore...try not to approach this issue as a legalism, but as an opportunity to give what you want (if anything). It seems you will have hundreds of thousands left, so why not be generous with a variety of ministries (does not have to just be your local church if they are poor stewards).

My daughter is getting a legal settlement. I feel we should give some for ministry, but do not feel compelled to 'tithe' it.

Principles, wisdom, love; not prescription, legalisms, duty.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

My church preaches if a person don`t pay tithes they are a thief and anyone who if caught being a leader or belong to the gospel team who doesn`t pay tithes is not allowed to be in any office or take part in leadership in any way in our church and some don`t even talk to a person who don`t pay tithes or sit at the same table with a tothes thief.

This is what tithes do in some church and mine.

What do you think about this????

Could be perceived as heavy-handed, cultish, authoritarian.

When I was a pastor, I taught the principle of tithing along with stewardship in general. I left it to the Spirit to convict or convince the people of any personal application.

It is not necessarily wrong to require church attendance, faithful giving, water baptism, etc. for people in leadership as an example and commitment. If it is done in a condemnatory, coercive way...this may be crossing the line.

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

I concur with much of your assessment and share the same concerns. We need to rethink how we do church. I just do not think we need to swing the pendulum to another extreme and think it more spiritual to not have buildings, etc. This is not the root problem. It is a heart and leadership issue. Let us respond to the principles of the Word and not react against the foibles of the modern church.

We don't need to swing the pendulum or whatever term you want to use to continue to allow this "experimental christianity". We don't need to rethink anything. We just need to follow the guidebook.

Meet with other believers at your homes, inns and public places.

Pray, Fellowship, Break Bread and study the Word of God in groups that are intimate enough so that you can actually get to really know eachother, instead of superficial nonsense.

Spread the gospel here and in other countries by starting more next to zero-overhead home churches instead of big building projects that require huge amounts of funds to be raised before anyone ever hears the word of God.

Of course you are not going to hear this from Johnny Pulpit anytime soon. They won't admit it, but they love being the "head pastor" at the top of a top-down hierarchy where they are essentially the CEO of a church-corporation (whatever that is) and have underlings to rule over not to mention a huge flock of brainwashed well intentioned but mislead "sheep" that won't dare question anything they say or do, until of course they have done something so obviously pagan that their eyes open.

Even when these guys get caught sleeping with the church secretary, some of their flocks still won't wake up. The sheep analogy is almost universally projected as what and how believers should behave, if they are "good" Christians. Dumb and compliant, ready and willing to go and do anything the shepherd says.

There are some problems with this. First of all, where do we get the idea that a human preacher is a shepherd over the persons who come to hear him preach? The bible says we are all priests with one High Priest, Jesus. So of course man cannot have that, that would mean we are all equally valid and all can read the Word on our own and hear from the High Priest directly.

Can't have that, we have to create a top-down hierarchy. Where do we get this idea that their are "senior" or "head" pastors? Where do we get this rank structure from? True bishops and deacons are mentioned, but no where does it say that they are better or more priveleged than the other believers. What we have today is clergy elitiism over the stupid "sheep".

If the sheep analogy was correct, why do we assume that the sheep are all to be baby ewe-lambs? Some sheep are rambunctious, RAMS with horns that will attack predators to protect the flock. Usually rams get alienated by these "shepherds" who cannot deal with them objecting to the fleecing they conduct.

The other problem with the sheep analogy is that I haven't heard of too many warrior sheep. On the one hand we are to be these sheep (re: easily manipulated) like humans, but on the other hand we are to put on the armor of God and do battle with the enemy. This "be a sheep" thing is so ingrained into christians that they truly have become sheepish. They can't fulfill the great commission because they have no ability to defend themselves. So they hide in the santuary planning potluck dinners. I know this because I have tried to get some of these sheople to come street witness and very few will. They just don't have it in them. What "it" is has been excused as a lack of "an extroverted personality" but I contend it is a lack of the Holy Spirit.

I have to say it.

Most of these churches today are NOT CHURCHES AT ALL.

They are glorified social clubs for hypocrites and thieves that have figured out how to have a good standard of living without producing anything. They stage one or two productions a week that they call "services" where they deliver sugar coated mindless drivel in a condescending "this is what it means because we say so" manner that is designed to avert any questions because they use the one way sermon approach. They say "come forward if you have questions" afterwards but they know full well that that puts the onus on the "sheep" to either challenge the shepherd (rather unsheep like behavior, that will cause people to question your salvation if done to much or at all in some "churches") or admit that they couldn't understand something because they are too dumb. In other words it is one way communication for an hour or two, that these guys deliver after spending a few minutes looking up some other guys sermons and commentaries that they then have the audacity to call "work". How come when the rest of the church studies the bible it isn't work? How come it is considered work if a staff member does it? BECAUSE THEY WANT YOU TO PAY THEM! It is mostly about the money.

I could go on about this for hours. Wake up, open your eyes and be a Berean.

Crow
July 1st, 2004, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

My church preaches if a person don`t pay tithes they are a thief and anyone who if caught being a leader or belong to the gospel team who doesn`t pay tithes is not allowed to be in any office or take part in leadership in any way in our church and some don`t even talk to a person who don`t pay tithes or sit at the same table with a tothes thief.

This is what tithes do in some church and mine.

What do you think about this????

I think that it is an evil teaching.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 02:03 PM
Cheesemun:

Ephesians 4 gives a 5-fold ministry of elders. The Bible does not just mention elders and deacons, but also pastors, teachers, etc.

Leadership must have integrity, character, etc. and is to serve and equip the people. The Bible is not anti-leadership.

The clergy-laity distinction is an unfortunate development in church history. We are all ministers, but that does not mean we are all leaders. We are a royal priesthood, but we cannot carry that analogy too far to contradict other explicit passages about true leadership serving the flock and accountable to the Head of the Church.

In your zeal for an ideal NT church (read Corinthians and Acts...the early church had growing pains, immorality, conflicts, etc. It is a myth that the early church was perfect or the prototype in every way) be careful to not develop a short-sighted ecclesiology that negates leadership, giving, ministry, buildings, etc. Meeting in a bar is no more or less spiritual than meeting in a building shared by multiple congregations (ethnic, different denominations, etc...this is just good stewardship). There are principles in the Bible, but varying cultural applications across geography and time. Cultural models differ as to the most effective way to be the people of God. It is poor hermeneutics to think we have to do everything exactly as the early Jewish or Roman Christians did.

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by godrulz
Cheesemun:

Ephesians 4 gives a 5-fold ministry of elders. The Bible does not just mention elders and deacons, but also pastors, teachers, etc.

Leadership must have integrity, character, etc. and is to serve and equip the people. The Bible is not anti-leadership.

So are pastors below or above teachers or evangelists? Or elders or deacons? Where is the hierarchy structure defined? It isn't is it? So who is "leading" who? I don't see where anyone Christian is declared to be a leader of any others. Can you show examples of this?

We are to be lead by the Holy Spirit.



Originally posted by godrulz
The clergy-laity distinction is an unfortunate development in church history. We are all ministers, but that does not mean we are all leaders. We are a royal priesthood, but we cannot carry that analogy too far to contradict other explicit passages about true leadership serving the flock and accountable to the Head of the Church.


Are priests leaders? Are we all priests? You are making distinctions that are not in the bible. I reall get the feeling that you just make stuff up. We are all accountable to our one High Priest. I don't need to go through any one, pastor, elder, deacon whatever. This is almost as stupid as praying to a dead saint to intercede for you. Are you a catholic?

How does one become one of your fictitious official leaders? Show me where the bible prohibits any or all christians from starting their own churches and proclaiming themselves head pastor?


Originally posted by godrulz
In your zeal for an ideal NT church (read Corinthians and Acts...the early church had growing pains, immorality, conflicts, etc. It is a myth that the early church was perfect or the prototype in every way) be careful to not develop a short-sighted ecclesiology that negates leadership, giving, ministry, buildings, etc. Meeting in a bar is no more or less spiritual than meeting in a building shared by multiple congregations (ethnic, different denominations, etc...this is just good stewardship). There are principles in the Bible, but varying cultural applications across geography and time. Cultural models differ as to the most effective way to be the people of God. It is poor hermeneutics to think we have to do everything exactly as the early Jewish or Roman Christians did.

I never said the early church or any church was perfect.

Was not the early model simpler than todays?

Do we not have just as many problems today (according to most reasonable people, much more)?

So we could have a simpler model or more complex.

Lets think about that.

Whenever you introduce complexity you have to introduce complications.

Complications are problems.

So a simpler model must have less problems.

You just want to justify churchianity at all costs.

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 02:22 PM
Pastors, teachers, elders, deacons, etc. are all essentially equal. There does not have to be a 'hierarchy'.

The Trinity is the ultimate unity and diversity. The Father, Son, Spirit are all equal, yet they have different roles. The Bible teaches headship within a family. Headship does not negate essential equality between a man and a woman. There are authority structures in society. This does not negate equality, but recognizes different roles and responsibilities.

Pastors, teachers, police, parents, etc. are delegated authorities from God. This does not have to degenerate into negative connotations. Servant leadership precludes sinful hierarchies, but it does not preclude leadership itself (cf. Moses; Timothy, etc.).

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Pastors, teachers, elders, deacons, etc. are all essentially equal. There does not have to be a 'hierarchy'.

The Trinity is the ultimate unity and diversity. The Father, Son, Spirit are all equal, yet they have different roles. The Bible teaches headship within a family. Headship does not negate essential equality between a man and a woman. There are authority structures in society. This does not negate equality, but recognizes different roles and responsibilities.

Pastors, teachers, police, parents, etc. are delegated authorities from God. This does not have to degenerate into negative connotations. Servant leadership precludes sinful hierarchies, but it does not preclude leadership itself (cf. Moses; Timothy, etc.).

Since you say that pastors and teachers and elders and deacons are all equal, why are they above the rest of the brethren?

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 02:51 PM
cf. Trinity, family, army, government.

Headship involves essential equality, but different roles.

Jesus said that the Father was GREATER than He was while He was on earth as the God-Man (Jn. 14). Hebrews 1 says He was BETTER than the angels (nature as their Creator), yet lower than them positionally during the incarnation. Phil. 2 (kenosis) also highlights the essential equality and unity of the Godhead. Christ's incarnation was an example of love and humility for the believers. He retained equality with the Father, yet was positionally subordinate.

We are equal with the US president as to our humanity (nature, essence), yet He is greater as to authority and function and role.

The NT leadership model supports the essential equality of all men and women in Christ, but allows for authority structures, differing roles/functions, etc.

It seems to me you are misunderstanding servant leadership and confusing it with the pagans who lord it over people using brute power or position. Jesus distinguished the two and so should we. If the church is guilty of the latter at times, this is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think you need to research biblical models of leadership and church governance in light of what godly, servant leadership is. Your previous bad examples of leadership or church involvement should not drive your formulation of a philosophy of ministry.

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

cf. Trinity, family, army, government.

Headship involves essential equality, but different roles.

Jesus said that the Father was GREATER than He was while He was on earth as the God-Man (Jn. 14). Hebrews 1 says He was BETTER than the angels (nature as their Creator), yet lower than them positionally during the incarnation. Phil. 2 (kenosis) also highlights the essential equality and unity of the Godhead. Christ's incarnation was an example of love and humility for the believers. He retained equality with the Father, yet was positionally subordinate.

We are equal with the US president as to our humanity (nature, essence), yet He is greater as to authority and function and role.

The NT leadership model supports the essential equality of all men and women in Christ, but allows for authority structures, differing roles/functions, etc.

It seems to me you are misunderstanding servant leadership and confusing it with the pagans who lord it over people using brute power or position. Jesus distinguished the two and so should we. If the church is guilty of the latter at times, this is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think you need to research biblical models of leadership and church governance in light of what godly, servant leadership is. Your previous bad examples of leadership or church involvement should not drive your formulation of a philosophy of ministry.

What does the bible say about tithing? Does it or does it not say that the lesser tithes to the greater?

You are saying that the "leaders" are not greater than the "lead" but that the "lead" should pay tithes to the "leaders".

godrulz
July 1st, 2004, 04:41 PM
I would distinguish OT giving to priests from NT giving. It would be illegal and unethical for people to give their money to a leader today (at least for charitable donation status). Churches must follow the law of the land in addition to the moral laws of God.

Many ministries or churches subscribe to umbrella organizations that have a code of ethics and accountability for funds. Missions boards disperse funds rather than a bunch of people giving to an individual who may be tempted to have multiple streams of money from well intentioned North Americans. This brings reproach on the gospel in foreign countries.

If we give to a church or ministry, there should be a board or something for accountability. This is wisdom, practical, and spiritual. A pastor should not be the direct recipient of funds (unless he is a cult leader).

I would not make a big doctrine on giving from OT practices that were limited to the Jewish priesthood and try to make this identical to the Church, the Body of Christ. Flesh out other principles and apply them in our day. If there is ambiguity in Scripture, then more than one model or pattern may be legit.

cravescheese
July 1st, 2004, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by godrulz
I would distinguish OT giving to priests from NT giving. It would be illegal and unethical for people to give their money to a leader today (at least for charitable donation status). Churches must follow the law of the land in addition to the moral laws of God.


What are you talking about? First of all, churches don't have to become 501.3(c) CORPORATIONS. They choose to do so. They choose to take a government muzzle in order to get more money.

See: http://www.hr235.org/

Secondly, don't kid yourself. When you tithe some of that money is going to pay your "leaders". And if more people tithe, guess what happens at the next board meeting? Pay raises! Why not, God is blessing right?


Originally posted by godrulz
Many ministries or churches subscribe to umbrella organizations that have a code of ethics and accountability for funds. Missions boards disperse funds rather than a bunch of people giving to an individual who may be tempted to have multiple streams of money from well intentioned North Americans. This brings reproach on the gospel in foreign countries.


Many? greater than 50% less than? What do you base your assertions on? What you feel is probably happening, or what is happening? You want to talk about ethics amongst christian ministries? Ask some of the Enyartites about Pat Robertson and his financial dealings with the family cable network. He raised alot of money for it and then sold it and pocketed the cash. Where are all these ethical ministers you speak of to get this WOLF off the air? How come he hasn't been disfellowshipped? We are talking millions and millions of dollars and he has not repented.



Originally posted by godrulz
If we give to a church or ministry, there should be a board or something for accountability. This is wisdom, practical, and spiritual. A pastor should not be the direct recipient of funds (unless he is a cult leader).


Board- schmoard. How many board members are not members of the church themselves? Where is the independent review? The board members are usually a rubber stamp for whatever the head pastor wants.


Originally posted by godrulz
I would not make a big doctrine on giving from OT practices that were limited to the Jewish priesthood and try to make this identical to the Church, the Body of Christ. Flesh out other principles and apply them in our day. If there is ambiguity in Scripture, then more than one model or pattern may be legit.

There is no pattern when it comes to tithing.

Giving is a different issue which we are not yet discussing.

Admit that there is no requirement to tithe today and we can discuss giving.

c.moore
July 2nd, 2004, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by cravescheese

The money may be a blessing in itself. You can't buy mercy, it is a free gift of God.

I say don't give the church anything, you don't have to. The Lord knows your heart. If you feel you have more than enough to support your family and are out of debt, have savings for an emergency (rainy day), have the kids college fund stocked and have paid off your car, house etc then maybe you have been working really hard and are a good steward and deserve a vacation?

Maybe you were blessed with that money so you could take a cruise around the world? Who knows.

What about your family? A husband takes care of not just his own wife and kids but his whole household. Maybe you have relatives that are struggling? An aunt or uncle who needs some car repairs? A niece or nephew working their way through colllege? Bless them before you bless complete strangers through your church or some para-church ministry.

Pray about it, but don't give it to anyone out of obligation.

If you have yourself and your whole household covered, than I would think about whether God might just want you to enjoy yourself, as in the tithe feast example.

If that doesn't seem right to you, you can invest it and grow the money so you can have more ability to help needy people.

If you want to give some away, I think starting with widows and orphans is a good idea, certainly you will be blessed if you help needy widows and orphans.

All of what you said sound so nice to to good to be true if all those things can be done , and I think any person will what that for their family and friends as well.

But can you prove that biblically for me??

I am under so much condemnation from the leaders of the church and pastors I don`t even know if I have the rights to be blessed , or in the favor of God, and as far as we teach that our prayers are not heard because of ´not paying tithes to the church I am a member .

What do you think the corn is all about , it mean as far as I be taught the church I attend is the corn, the place where I get information and grow in the Lord.

So my church say even the staff can`t get paid unless the tithes are payed by the memebers and the rent , Electricity, and heat is payed by tithes, as well and the pastorsl.

So we feel so guilty if tithes is not payed to the church we attend.

Can someone help me here on this????


God Bless

c.moore
July 2nd, 2004, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by cravescheese

Jesus said that the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil.

It sounds to me like these people love money and are causing all sorts of evil by falsely accusing people of the invented sin of stealing tithes from God.

I would find another church or start my own.

My mind , and flesh has been telling me this , but I never heard God tell me this.

I think I will want to obey and wait for God to say what to do.

cravescheese
July 2nd, 2004, 01:40 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

All of what you said sound so nice to to good to be true if all those things can be done , and I think any person will what that for their family and friends as well.

But can you prove that biblically for me??

I am under so much condemnation from the leaders of the church and pastors I don`t even know if I have the rights to be blessed , or in the favor of God, and as far as we teach that our prayers are not heard because of ´not paying tithes to the church I am a member .

What do you think the corn is all about , it mean as far as I be taught the church I attend is the corn, the place where I get information and grow in the Lord.

So my church say even the staff can`t get paid unless the tithes are payed by the memebers and the rent , Electricity, and heat is payed by tithes, as well and the pastorsl.

So we feel so guilty if tithes is not payed to the church we attend.

Can someone help me here on this????

God Bless

I guess the first question is where do you get the idea that you do have to pay a tithe (tenth) from to begin with?

If it is just because your church says so, well what if they told you you have to let the head pastor have sex with your wife?

Tell them to prove it to you biblically. There has been a ton of verses posted in this thread showing that believers are not under the law. That the tithe law was to support the priest class that could not own land and thus needed to be supported with food, clothing etc. That even if the tithe law were applicable (it isn't) all believers are considered priests, so that would mean you tithe to yourself.

What else do you need? A verse that states by name, that C. Moore's church is teaching an untruth?

Crow
July 2nd, 2004, 02:07 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

So my church say even the staff can`t get paid unless the tithes are payed by the memebers and the rent , Electricity, and heat is payed by tithes, as well and the pastorsl.

So we feel so guilty if tithes is not payed to the church we attend.

Can someone help me here on this????


God Bless

c.moore, I went to church tonight, and no one paid a red cent of tithes or offerings.

Church is not a building or organization. Church is people.

It was not necessary for us to have money. In the case of home churches, there is no overhead.

Give what you think is appropriate. Tithing is like baptism, of the Law. If you look in Acts, and in the post-crucifixion NT, you will see that giving is voluntarily, and by what a person feels appropriate.

God doesn't need water or money. Give as you feel appropriate in light of your resources, your responsibilities, and the needs of your church assembly.

PS--Church assemblies are not immune to the lure of "the root of all evil." Look at what money is used for in your church. If it is used for good purposes and necessities, that's wonderful. If it's used to have the snazziest looking church in town, with the biggest lawn and the tallest steeple, most stained glass, and the most ornate choir ornaments and trim, bells, and whistles, then ask yourself if those values are in line with yours, or if another church assembly might not be more appropriate for you.

c.moore
July 2nd, 2004, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by elected4ever

e4e ---------- The thief is in the pulpit and those in leadership are facilitators of the theft. It is control by false guilt. You clam to have demons cast out in your church and you cant even discern a thief. Sounds to me like Freak can't discern demons ether. Nothing to brag about in your church.:nono: :kookoo:



e4e ------- I am happy that you were not serious. It was just a poor joke as I have heard that same message from pulpits in a serious fashion as attested to by C-Moore.

A matter of fact me and freak disagreed about the tithes , and even said it is not a true teaching in my church about teaching tithes, and it is putting legalism on the people.

So As I think back on the debates we had here intithes I think he discerned the truth and I am my eyes and heart is opening up to see both sides and see the truth .

i must really say Freak is a real man of God who i respect in all ways , praise the Lord for him, and his wife.


God Bless

cravescheese
July 2nd, 2004, 02:13 AM
Originally posted by Crow

c.moore, I went to church tonight, and no one paid a red cent of tithes or offerings.

Church is not a building or organization. Church is people.

It was not necessary for us to have money. In the case of home churches, there is no overhead.

Give what you think is appropriate. Tithing is like baptism, of the Law. If you look in Acts, and in the post-crucifixion NT, you will see that giving is voluntarily, and by what a person feels appropriate.

God doesn't need water or money. Give as you feel appropriate in light of your resources, your responsibilities, and the needs of your church assembly.

PS--Church assemblies are not immune to the lure of "the root of all evil." Look at what money is used for in your church. If it is used for good purposes and necessities, that's wonderful. If it's used to have the snazziest looking church in town, with the biggest lawn and the tallest steeple, most stained glass, and the most ornate choir ornaments and trim, bells, and whistles, then ask yourself if those values are in line with yours, or if another church assembly might not be more appropriate for you.

Well said Crow, well said!

c.moore
July 2nd, 2004, 05:03 AM
So many preacher say it is not about the law of tithes it is all about the first love to Christ.

It is showing that we put christ first even in our money to a point of 10%.

You are right crow about a fancy church and buying things which is over the head of the church , and this is what my church has done and is doing, which I and my wife don´t agree with at all specially when having a finiacial problem, so they force the people to pay tithes and offering to pay for their mistakes , and debts.

But the church say`s the money is not ours anyways it is God 10% which is our to say what we should do with it.

So How you think about that???

Crow
July 2nd, 2004, 05:30 AM
I think your church has a poor grasp of scriptures, and cannot understand that the Body of Christ is not under the Law. And in the case of tithes, they probably don't want to understand.

Personally, I would not be comfortable in a church assembly with such poor financial practices.

There are many church assemblies. We aren't chained to one. Try other churches. You might just find one that is well grounded in scripture and has it's priorities straight.

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 05:48 AM
c. moore...

1 Tim 6:3-12

If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. But godliness actually is a means of great gain, when accompanied by contentment. For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it either. And if we have food and covering, with these we shall be content. But those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires which plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith, and pierced themselves with many a pang. But flee from these things, you man of God; and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance and gentleness. Fight the good fight of faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called, and you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses.






The problem, dear c.moore, is that you need to "flee" from the assemblies that you have grown accustom. You are in a cult that has you focusing your attention on what God is going to do for you, how He is going to "bless" you! You have left your first love. The leaders of your assembly are men of a "depraved mind" and "deprived of the truth", whose sole desire is to teach you to obey their doctrines (the doctrines of men) for the purpose of gaining from you, and not God.

Please get your eyes off of yourself and fixed on Jesus! Stop obsessing over money and health, and live a quiet life in ALL "contentment", giving thanks to God in ALL things.

Jesus loves you.

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 08:33 AM
Paul talked about giving in the church on the first day of the week. (I do not know where some of you get the idea that we can give to ourselves because we are 'priests' or that there is a problem with bringing our money to the local church...this is rationalization and rebellion). He taught systematic and proportional giving with the right motive and attitude. This Timothy passage is a rebuke for a segment of people that were controlled by greed and money. It has no interpretation or application for believers or leaders who teach and practice giving and stewardship.

It is presumptious to write off cmoores church without knowing all its beliefs and practices ('cult').

I personally would not be making faith decisions based on sozo, cheese, or my pontifications. It seems to me cmoore is getting more confused here than helped. I think he knows in his heart what is right.

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

It seems to me cmoore is getting more confused here than helped. I think he knows in his heart what is right.

If he does, then he knows that you are his enemy, a hater of Christ, and an evil worker.
Paul talked about giving in the church on the first day of the week. So what?? Are you that braindead, that you have missed everyone's point about the importance of supporting the assembly that you attend? THERE IS NO BIBLICAL SUPPORT FOR THE CHURCH TO TITHE!!!
It is presumptious to write off cmoores church without knowing all its beliefs and practices ('cult'). You are a fool, and an idiot! You make judgments all the time, even if they may not be negative ones, they are still judgments! (And they are almost always wrong).

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by Crow

...PS--Church assemblies are not immune to the lure of "the root of all evil." Look at what money is used for in your church. If it is used for good purposes and necessities, that's wonderful. If it's used to have the snazziest looking church in town, with the biggest lawn and the tallest steeple, most stained glass, and the most ornate choir ornaments and trim, bells, and whistles, then ask yourself if those values are in line with yours, or if another church assembly might not be more appropriate for you. Many churches will not tell their contributors just what the money is used for...

Some good questions to ask about the way the church spends the money you give...

Questions To Ask About Your Church’s Finances

1. What is the actual annual income of the church? Does the church sponsor (have financial interest in) other businesses like schools, book stores, retail businesses, “book ministries�, selling copies of sermons, etc? If so, be sure to count the income from these interests in the total.

2. Who actually holds title to the land, buildings, and other assets of the church?

3. How much does the church spend on compensation for the pastor(s), their salaries, housing, housing allowance, cars, retirement funds, discretionary funds, etc?

4. How much money does the church owe – how much in mortgages and loan interest?

5. How much does the church spend on maintenance, non-pastoral staff, vehicles, and buildings?

6. How much does the church spend on advertising and marketing to get new people to visit/join? (This counts paying for visiting evangelists, musicians, special events, etc.)

7. How much does the church spend on reproducing itself elsewhere? (i.e. “missions� and church planting)

8. How much does the church spend on helping the poor and the homeless?

9. How much does the church spend on helping rehabilitate prisoners?

10. How much does the church spend taking care of widows and orphans?

11. How much does the church spend educating children and adults?

===============
Ask these questions to your pastor or responsible church board member and see what kinds of answers you receive. If they don't answer you openly and honestly, that should tell you something about the financial integrity of the organization.

"Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own?
- Luke 16:10-12

c.moore
July 2nd, 2004, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

Many churches will not tell their contributors just what the money is used for...

Some good questions to ask about the way the church spends the money you give...

Questions To Ask About Your Church’s Finances

1. What is the actual annual income of the church? Does the church sponsor (have financial interest in) other businesses like schools, book stores, retail businesses, “book ministries�, selling copies of sermons, etc? If so, be sure to count the income from these interests in the total.

2. Who actually holds title to the land, buildings, and other assets of the church?

3. How much does the church spend on compensation for the pastor(s), their salaries, housing, housing allowance, cars, retirement funds, discretionary funds, etc?

4. How much money does the church owe – how much in mortgages and loan interest?

5. How much does the church spend on maintenance, non-pastoral staff, vehicles, and buildings?

6. How much does the church spend on advertising and marketing to get new people to visit/join? (This counts paying for visiting evangelists, musicians, special events, etc.)

7. How much does the church spend on reproducing itself elsewhere? (i.e. “missions� and church planting)

8. How much does the church spend on helping the poor and the homeless?

9. How much does the church spend on helping rehabilitate prisoners?

10. How much does the church spend taking care of widows and orphans?

11. How much does the church spend educating children and adults?

===============
Ask these questions to your pastor or responsible church board member and see what kinds of answers you receive. If they don't answer you openly and honestly, that should tell you something about the financial integrity of the organization.

"Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own?
- Luke 16:10-12


We have every year a anual finance that tell all we spend and what we recieved throught the year which is told to all the members of the church at a meeting .
Also what is missing and needed.
my church does this in the open to all to see .

They explain also the needs why tithes is so important so the church can survive.

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

We have every year a anual finance that tell all we spend and what we recieved throught the year which is told to all the members of the church at a meeting .
Also what is missing and needed.
my church does this in the open to all to see .

They explain also the needs why tithes is so important so the church can survive.

c.moore... why are you listening to a professed atheist?

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

c.moore... why are you listening to a professed atheist?
Perhaps because this atheist is also a...

... former pastor
... former church board member
... former president and board member of a Christian charitable organization

I've got experience Sozo, do you have anything besides belligerence?

What does your local assembly do about those points? :think:

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

Perhaps because this atheist is also a...

... former pastor
... former church board member
... former president and board member of a Christian charitable organization

I've got experience Sozo, do you have anything besides belligerence?

What does your local assembly do about those points? :think:

I never said that it was not good advice, but it just amazes me that you reject the very source that you use to make your point.

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 09:34 AM
sozo='intolerant' (I would not be proud of this label)

Perhaps a moderator would like to rebuke sozo for saying a follower of Christ with pastoral ministry background in an evangelical church is a 'hater of Christ' and an evil worker. My academic background all my life has been honors, so I hope I am not braindead. Attacking a member of the Body of Christ is displeasing to the Lord of the Church.

Never mind, I am sure the Spirit of God will convict and rebuke sozo. He has no discernment or credibility. It is unfortunate that other believers are silent in the face of his slander. Speak the truth in love, rather than slander based on incomplete knowledge.

Ad hominem arguments (attacking the person instead of the issue) are a sign of sozo's weak mind.

I suppose Jesus and Paul were called fools and idiots. Thankfully, my life is hid in Christ, and sozo's name calling will not hurt me (unlike sticks and stones that break my bones).

Sozo, at this point you are loved, but not respected par moi.

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

sozo='intolerant' (I would not be proud of this label)

I know YOU wouldn't, that is why YOU are so gullible... YOU "tolerate" false teaching and false teachers.

Tolerance is just another word for hate.
Perhaps a moderator would like to rebuke sozo for saying a follower of Christ with pastoral ministry background in an evangelical church is a 'hater of Christ' and an evil worker. Chances are greater that you will be rebuked for leading someone like c.moore down a path of destruction.
My academic background all my life has been honors, so I hope I am not braindead. This proves that you are.
Attacking a member of the Body of Christ is displeasing to the Lord of the Church. When have I done that?
Never mind, I am sure the Spirit of God will convict and rebuke sozo In your dreams. God is waiting for you to climb out of your religious swamp, and be cleansed of your self-righteousness.
He has no discernment or credibility.:rolleyes:
It is unfortunate that other believers are silent in the face of his slander. Perhaps that is because they have "discerment and credibility". Has anyone actually agreed with YOU?
I suppose Jesus and Paul were called fools and idiots Perhaps, but it was the fools and idiots whom Jesus and Paul named as such who believed and taught like YOU.

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

I never said that it was not good advice, but it just amazes me that you reject the very source that you use to make your point. My list is based on my personal and business experience. That's my source. ;)

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

My list is based on my personal and business experience. That's my source. ;)


Originally posted by Zakath

Ask these questions to your pastor or responsible church board member and see what kinds of answers you receive. If they don't answer you openly and honestly, that should tell you something about the financial integrity of the organization.

"Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own?
- Luke 16:10-12

:confused:

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

Perhaps because this atheist is also a...

... former pastor
... former church board member
... former president and board member of a Christian charitable organization

I've got experience Sozo, do you have anything besides belligerence?

What does your local assembly do about those points? :think:

Unfortunately, our friend Zakath has demonstrated more maturity and wisdom at times than dear sozo.

Most churches/ministries have an independent secular accountant audit the books (requirement for charitable status?) for accountability. This does not preclude the possibility of abuses, but minimizes it.

I believe those attacking the credibility of the average local church are attacking a 'straw man' caricature. They are painting every assembly with the same brush as the few that are dysfunctional. This is another argument to be part of a fellowship of churches rather than an independent lone ranger group run by one leader.

Sozo, on other threads I have defended biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity in the face of the errors of Mormonism, atheism, etc. Are you sure you want to conclude that I teach and support lies and falsehood because we differ on the subject of giving? It would also be wise to cool the personal attacks and rhetoric and deal with issues. Respectful dialogue earns one a right to be heard. Insulting people does not make your ideas palatable.

Perhaps it would help if I knew your basic beliefs to see if you are even a Christian (my atheistic work partner thinks you are unChristlike and should be censured?!)

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM
Accountability in organizations, especially those funded by soliciting donations (including churches), can really go a long way to preventing abuses or uncovering them early enough so that they are not fatal to the organization.

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Unfortunately, our friend Zakath has demonstrated more maturity and wisdom at times than dear sozo.

Most cultists on this site generally are in agreement with the resident atheists, homos, liberals, and trolls.

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

:confused: I don't reject the Christian scriptures entirely, I merely reject certain interpretations of them. ;)

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

I don't reject the Christian scriptures entirely, I merely reject certain interpretations of them. ;)

So it's not that you don't believe in a god, it's just that he is you?

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 10:13 AM
I thought sozo said on another thread that he was fed up and quitting TOL? Man of his word? He calls people cultists who disagree with him and wonders why people do not rally to support his causes= disingenuous.

Zakath
July 2nd, 2004, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

So it's not that you don't believe in a god, it's just that he is you? Not at all, but as the last Lord of the Sith would say, "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

I'm not a good candidate for a deity anyway. I'm too busy. ;)

cur_deus_homo
July 2nd, 2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

I'm not a good candidate for a deity anyway. I'm too busy. ;)
But it's great to see you posting here again. TOL is not the same without the Z-Man rampaging from thread to thread, poking and prodding people "to articulate what and why they believe."

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

I thought sozo said on another thread that he was fed up and quitting TOL? Man of his word? He calls people cultists who disagree with him and wonders why people do not rally to support his causes= disingenuous.

You must study your bible, like you do everything else.

On this particular thread, the only one who has lost all integrity for the truth, is YOU!
I have plenty of support from the Christians on this site, but none from false teachers like yourself.

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 12:33 PM
Do you believe in the Deity of Christ? Assembly of God does not ordain false teachers (I was ordained in the Canadian sister organization PAOC that has a statement of faith that you would mostly agree with...except the Pentecostal distinctives). A differing view on giving does not make one a false teacher any more than if two scholars differ on eschatology. Grow up. There is a difference between core, essential truths and peripheral areas that equally godly believers disagree on. Who is the legalist here?

(you make sweeping generalizations based on one small area of study:nono:

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Do you believe in the Deity of Christ? Of course.
Assembly of God does not ordain false teachers. Really?

How many would you like me to list from the Latter Rain Movement alone?
A differing view on giving does not make one a false teacher any more than if two scholars differ on eschatology. Your view on "giving" is only a symptom of your core belief system, which is easily discerned as heretical.

There is only one gospel, and anything else is false.

AOG in many cases adds or takes away from the message that Paul once delivered to all the saints.

Your views on giving are contrary to sound doctrine and make clear additions to the gospel.

No one here is against giving, but you, and the AOG, have created something out of nothing.

I would define the AOG as a cult. They, above all other organizations, are moved through emotional, and fad based so-called "moves of God".

Their veiw on the doctrine of salvation is evidence enough to put them outside the faith.

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 03:20 PM
If AOG is outside biblical Christianity (they are a very conservative Pentecostal group believing the essentials of the faith that all evangelicals subscribe to), then so are Southern Baptists, etc.

AOG considers Latter-Rain theology heresy.

What exactly is their view on the doctrine of salvation? Perhaps you would like to quote their statement of faith and supporting Scriptures to prove your accusation. They are not Calvinists, but they are squarely in the Reformation tradition (Arminian). I do not agree with every AOG idea.

What is your view of salvation?

What do I believe about the doctrine of salvation and the atonement? How do you know this? Mind reading?

Is your happy, holy huddle the only group with all truth? Who then is really the cultist/sectarian?

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by godrulz
AOG considers Latter-Rain theology heresy.


You said that "Assembly of God does not ordain false teachers".

Perhaps you would like to rephrase that.
What exactly is their view on the doctrine of salvation? It's conditional, and insecure.
They are not Calvinists, but they are squarely in the Reformation tradition (Arminian). Both Calvinism and Arminianism are outside the fundementals of the gospel message.


I do not agree with every AOG idea. Good for you! Then perhaps you would like to admit that tithing is not a prescription for the body of Christ.


What is your view of salvation?


First and foremost, it should be quite clear that there is "no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved."

"God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

So, can we agree that it is through Christ Jesus, and Jesus alone that men are saved?

Who is Jesus?

"...these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God"

"Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God."

"...if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved; for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."

So, can we agree that Jesus is the Son of God, and that He is Lord? As we also agree that salvation is through Him.

Eph 2:8 tells us:

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;"

Romans tells us that if you confess that Jesus is Lord, and believe that God raised Him from the dead, you are saved and we just read that it is by grace.

God gives us the grace to believe that Jesus is Lord and that God raised Him from the dead, and when we accept this in our hearts, and confess it with our mouths, the result is righteousness and salvation.

What is it about Jesus that saves us? What did He do?

"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him"

"He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world"

"In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins"

Propitiation - God is satisfied!

Jesus satisfied a debt He did not owe, for us who had a debt we could not pay and God accepted it and we were reconciled to God.

"For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son"

What debt did Jesus pay?

"For the wages of sin is death"

Jesus paid for our sin.

"For the death that He died, He died to sin, once for all"

Jesus died to sin for all, and that death, satisfied God and the debt was paid, and all were reconciled to Him.

Reconciled - a change in relationship

"God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation"

"...we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

(We beg you on behalf of Christ, let your relationship with God be changed)

God has changed the relationship through the blood of Christ, by removing the debt that we owed, and no longer counting our trespasses against us, and He desires that we change our relationship with Him.

Jesus was raised from the dead

"...knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him"

Jesus is alive!

"For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;"

We are saved by His life!

"For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

"...whoever believes may in Him have eternal life"

"...whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life".

He who believes in the Son has eternal life

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life".

"For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life"

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life"

"I came that they might have life"

"I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand"

"I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies"

"And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent"

"...these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name."

Salvation is life! The life of God! It is eternal!

What do we receive when we believe? LIFE!!

"Go your way, stand and speak to the people in the temple the whole message of this Life"

"For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ"

"So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men."

"...as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord"

"For if their rejection be the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?"

"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me".

"For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God"

"When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory"

"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according to the promise of life in Christ Jesus"

"...but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel"

"...being justified by His grace we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life"

"And this is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life."

"And the witness is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son"

"He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life"

"These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life "

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me.

If you have the Son, you have LIFE! You don't get life, you have life.

"It is the Spirit who gives life "

"He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive"

"...you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him."

"Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?"

"...your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own"

"for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

"In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation-- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise"

"And we know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us."

"By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit."

Salvation is receiving the very LIFE of God!

godrulz
July 2nd, 2004, 05:15 PM
sozo: "Salvation is conditional and insecure."

I believe in conditional eternal security (not TULIP unconditional eternal security= once saved always saved).

If Calvinism and Arminianism are equally wrong, what is your position? How do you feel about Open Theism (my preferred view)?

Sozo
July 2nd, 2004, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

sozo: "Salvation is conditional and insecure." That quote you attributed to me is my objection with the AOG concerning their view of salvation.


If Calvinism and Arminianism are equally wrong, what is your position? How do you feel about Open Theism (my preferred view)? That is an interesting comment, coming from you. How can you say that, and still hold so tightly to your traditions?

I will have to take a break from you, and give you the benefit of my doubts.

There is alot about Open Theism that I agree with, but primarily I hold to the reality of the "exchanged life", when speaking of our relationship with Christ.

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 02:01 PM
I try to base my views on the Bible. I am not AOG and disagree with some of their ideas.

I see Open Theism as a sub-type of Arminianism (Enyartists would disagree). AOG writes papers against Open Theism supporting exhaustive foreknowledge. Calvinists write papers against Arminianism and Open Theism supporting TULIP/predestination.

I have non-traditional views in some areas. Our beliefs should be based on Scripture, not traditions or statements of faith or creeds.

I do not like the idea of salvation being insecure. Is that their words? I am not OSAS, but believe we are secure in Christ if we continue in the faith. If we repudiate our faith once for all to the death, we do not have relationship or eternal life. He is able to save and keep us, but we can theoretically rebel and reject due to free will. There are grounds and conditions for salvation. All relevant Scriptures must be looked at.

For a Scriptural refutation of OSAS by a Southern Baptist:

"Life in the Son" by Robert Shank (Westcott)

(A study of the doctrine of perseverance)

elected4ever
July 3rd, 2004, 05:00 PM
godrulz


I am not OSAS, but believe we are secure in Christ if we continue in the faith.

e4e -------- There is no passable way you can be secure in Christ and believe that you have the say so about your continued relationship with God. The two ideas are exclusive of one another. The Apostle Paul address that idea of your personal control in Galatians 3. He ask the question, Galatians 3:1 ٦O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2 ÂźThis only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 ÂźAre ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

The Apostle John testifies as what our relationship with the Father is, 1 John 3:9 ÂźWhosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

The Apostle John also testifies as to our condition as long as we remain in this life, 1 John 4:13 ÂźHereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 ٦And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 ÂźWhosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16 ÂźAnd we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17 ٦Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
18 ÂźThere is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

DO YOU FEAR THAT YOU MAY DO SOMETHING WRONG OR MIGHT SOMEDAY REJECT WHAT YOU NOW ASSUME YOU BELIEVE BECAUSE OF SOME CIRCUMSTANCE THAT MAY DEVELOP?

Your theology is the most inconsistent that I have seen.
:think:

:e4e:

billwald
July 3rd, 2004, 05:07 PM
"If AOG is outside biblical Christianity (they are a very conservative Pentecostal group believing the essentials of the faith that all evangelicals subscribe to)"

My Daughter and her inlaws are AOG. I have been to her congregations in SanJose and in Phoenix. They both preach a "health and wealth" gospel - if you don't have money and health it is because of insufficient faith. It has messed them up. They tithe their pittance and wait for God to bless them.

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by elected4ever

godrulz



e4e -------- There is no passable way you can be secure in Christ and believe that you have the say so about your continued relationship with God. The two ideas are exclusive of one another. The Apostle Paul address that idea of your personal control in Galatians 3. He ask the question, Galatians 3:1 ٦O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2 ÂźThis only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 ÂźAre ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

The Apostle John testifies as what our relationship with the Father is, 1 John 3:9 ÂźWhosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

The Apostle John also testifies as to our condition as long as we remain in this life, 1 John 4:13 ÂźHereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 ٦And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 ÂźWhosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16 ÂźAnd we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17 ٦Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
18 ÂźThere is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

DO YOU FEAR THAT YOU MAY DO SOMETHING WRONG OR MIGHT SOMEDAY REJECT WHAT YOU NOW ASSUME YOU BELIEVE BECAUSE OF SOME CIRCUMSTANCE THAT MAY DEVELOP?

Your theology is the most inconsistent that I have seen.
:think:

:e4e:

Galatians 3 must be interpreted in its historical context e.g. issue with the Judaizers; relationship of the New and Old Covenants; law vs grace, etc. It is not about the OSAS issue.

I John 1:9 says that believers can sin. The verb tenses in the book show that believers do not continuously persist in sin. The Greek does not support the idea that it is impossible to sin if we are saved.

Other verses show the conditionality of salvation. Jude 24, 25 says that God is able to keep us. I do not fear my future failures, because I know and love God. I made a supreme choice to live for Him rather than myself. If I ever deviate from this in rebellion, I deserve the consequences of a severed relationship. I would be culpable and God would be vindicated. It would be my fault, not God's. There is no reason to fall from grace, but Scripture teaches that it is theoretically possible.

Salvation is a love relationship. It must be freely entered into and maintained. It involves the moral realm which involves choice. Traditional theology confuses the issue by moving things into the realm of metaphysics (things), seeing salvation as something irreversible that is done to us (misunderstands regeneration).

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by billwald

"If AOG is outside biblical Christianity (they are a very conservative Pentecostal group believing the essentials of the faith that all evangelicals subscribe to)"

My Daughter and her inlaws are AOG. I have been to her congregations in SanJose and in Phoenix. They both preach a "health and wealth" gospel - if you don't have money and health it is because of insufficient faith. It has messed them up. They tithe their pittance and wait for God to bless them.

Local churches have some freedom in belief. The official AOG position repudiates Word-Faith. These congregations are out of step with their denomination. They should consider going independent. False teaching is damaging.

Sozo
July 3rd, 2004, 09:37 PM
godrulz... I guarantee you that no Open Theist would have anything to do with you. Your view of salvation is anti-Christ, and a doctrine of demons.

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

godrulz... I guarantee you that no Open Theist would have anything to do with you. Your view of salvation is anti-Christ, and a doctrine of demons.

Vote: Do the Open Theists here have a problem with my view of salvation and understanding of Open Theism (based on many posts elsewhere)? I have read many of the standard Open Theist books (Pinnock, Boyd, Sanders, Rice, Basinger, Pratney, Wolterstorff, Haskins, McCabe, etc.). My views line up in essence with their views.


What IS my view of salvation? How did you find out about my beliefs on soteriology, since I have posted limited information about my understanding?

I agree with the Southern Baptist, Robert Shank, on the doctrine of perseverance (reject OSAS).

I agree with the great scholar, Albert Barnes, on the nature of the atonement (there are at least 4 major views on the atonement with several being equally accepted by Bible-believing evangelicals...you are out on a limb to say a legit view is the doctrine of demons).

What is your view of salvation? TULIP/Calvinism/Reformed? I reject the Commercial Transaction THEORY of the atonement as unbiblical.

Are you sure most of our understandings are different?

Can someone shed light on sozo's personality or issues? I am trying hard not to equate sozo with bozo. Was there bad potty training (I apologize sozo for my frustration with your behaviour and irrational conclusions) :(

elected4ever
July 3rd, 2004, 10:59 PM
godrulz , the problem is that their writings are at odds with the scripture and to agree with them is to be at odds with the scripture. So much for your discredited scholars. Bad company.:doh:

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by elected4ever

godrulz , the problem is that their writings are at odds with the scripture and to agree with them is to be at odds with the scripture. So much for your discredited scholars. Bad company.:doh:

Sozo's contention was that I was out of step with Open Theists. I was suggesting that this comment was inaccurate. Whether Open Theism is biblical is another issue for another day. If we line up with proponents and views that are unscriptural, then our views are unbiblical (I agree).

elected4ever
July 3rd, 2004, 11:24 PM
I don't know what isms are. Makes no never mind to me what they are. If you are born again you cannot become unborn again. My salvation nor anyone's salvation depend on anything but the promises of God and if God cannot be trusted to keep His word then we are insecure. When you say that once you have accepted Christ and received the new birth then you can become unborn and that is a lie from the pits of hell. You are saying that God is untrustworthy. That's sick.

godrulz
July 3rd, 2004, 11:31 PM
God is faithful and trustworthy. Calvinism and Arminianism and Open Theism can hold to their views of the perseverance of the saints and uphold the character and attributes of God. The issue is not Christology, but anthropology= whether man has a free will or not. God keeps His Word, but do we always keep our word?

There are verses that talk about the security of the believer, but it is possible to cease believing (then the promises no longer apply). Other passages talk about the possibility of apostasy and the conditionality of salvation. This should not create insecurity for a child of God, but serves as a warning for those who lose their first love or flirt with the world and the flesh (Rev. 3; I John).

"Born again" is a metaphor. The analogies between physical and spiritual birth are not identical. The few similarities must also be contrasted with the many lack of parallels. Salvation is not a metaphysical change. Salvation is a change of ultimate intentions, relationship, and ownership.

Robert Shank, in "Life in the Son", explains biblically why the statement of being 'unborn' is not a logical argument paralleling the true nature of salvation.

elected4ever
July 4th, 2004, 01:07 AM
godrulz
The issue is not Christology, but anthropology= whether man has a free will or not. God keeps His Word, but do we always keep our word?

E4e ----------- I understand what the flesh is like. After you and I were presented with the truth of Christ and repented of our sin, do you think for one minute that our flesh changed it's character? Off course not. Our flesh was dead to God. Our flesh was the enemy of God. Do you suppose that our flesh is any less so now? Our flesh natures hate God all the more. Why? Because our flesh natures still wont to control what we do. God in His goodness did not leave us to the devices of our flesh to determine our eternal destiny.

Do you believe that God would leave our eternal destiny to His mortal enemy? Why do we have such a hard time in the flesh? Is it not that we have received a Holy and righteous Spirit that is born of His seed and the love that we now posses constrains the flesh and there is a total all out war going own for control. Back and forth the battles rage. Battles between the living, the spirit that we have received from God and the flesh Gods mortal enemy.

godrulz
There are verses that talk about the security of the believer, but it is possible to cease believing (then the promises no longer apply). Other passages talk about the possibility of apostasy and the conditionality of salvation. This should not create insecurity for a child of God, but serves as a warning for those who lose their first love or flirt with the world and the flesh (Rev. 3; I John).

e4e -------- have you noticed the unconditional requirements of righteousness required by God? Jesus was the only righteous person that ever lived and that sir is the standard by which all flesh will be judged. In order to receive the Kingdom of God you must be as righteous as Jesus is. How are you, a mortal man going to achieve that righteous standard? The only standard by which we can judge righteousness is the law and if we fail to keep even the smallest part of the law we suffer immediate death. You honestly think that God would leave that decision up to you. Don't you know that if you could commit more sin after salvation that it would require that Jesus be crucified the second time and be put to open shame. It is not weather we choose to be saved and then not to be saved. It is the fact that after a very short period of time, the moment you commit one sin you are forever lost with no chance of recovery. You only get one bite at the apple. If you accept Christ once and taste the heavenly gift once for you to fall away there would be no more sacrifice for your sin.

godrulz
"Born again" is a metaphor. The analogies between physical and spiritual birth are not identical. The few similarities must also be contrasted with the many lack of parallels. Salvation is not a metaphysical change. Salvation is a change of ultimate intentions, relationship, and ownership.

e4e ----If the new birth is a metaphor then Jesus lied. If the new birth is a metaphor the Apostle John lied. The whole testimony of Christ and the Apostles become irrelevant. It's all a hoax and we participate in an exercise of futility and believe a lie. If the new birth is not real we are all yet in our sin and this conversation is moot. This one thing I know, if you are not born again your very name on this board is a lie and God does not rule in your life. It is that simple. If you are not born of the seed of God you are not righteous and you are are a sinner bound for a devil's hell and this saddens me immensely

OMEGA
July 4th, 2004, 01:52 AM
Godrulz,

I think that from my experience with the Holy Spirit in my mind

is that it first affected me in my having a very Strong Conscience.

After that I was aware of anything and everything that would be

possibly a sin.

After many years I am Pre-Aware of any possible sin and guard

against it.

What is your Experience with the Holy Spirit ???

godrulz
July 4th, 2004, 02:48 AM
The Holy Spirit convicts of sin and convinces of truth. It is possible to grieve and quench the Spirit. He points to Jesus.

born again= born from above= born anew; Billy Graham quit using 'born again' because it became such a cultural cliche. It is used twice in the Bible, and is one phrase among many that illustrate the nature of salvation. Jesus did not tell everyone they had to be 'born again'. He used it in one context only.

Unless you are born again you cannot see the kingdom of heaven (Jn. 3).

We are adopted as children of God when we receive Christ. We receive the Holy Spirit who reproduces the character and life of Christ in us.

The new birth is a reality. I contend it is a metaphor for salvation, but expresses spiritual truth. It is not a literal birth comparable to physical birth.

Why do sozo and elect assume I am of the devil or going to hell every time we differ or misunderstand a point? Whitefield, Wesley, Edwards, etc. differed in their theologies, yet were effective in preaching the Gospel. It is possible to be a Calvinist, Arminian, or Open Theist and be a genuine believer.

Sozo
July 4th, 2004, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

The Holy Spirit convicts of sin If you are making this statement to include Christians, then it further proves your relationship with religion, and not with Christ.
It is possible to be a Calvinist, Arminian, or Open Theist and be a genuine believer. It is not possible to preach another gospel, and be a believer. You have repeatedly shared "another gospel".

godrulz
July 4th, 2004, 08:37 AM
Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses preach another gospel and believe in a different god and Jesus.

The Great Calvinists and Arminians in the Body of Christ through the centuries had the wisdom and grace to recognize each other as fellow believers with differing understanding of some areas of theology. They did not deny the essentials of the gospel, which include the Deity and resurrection of Christ. The Gospel is the person and work of Christ.

Sozo accuses others of being cultists, while he behaves in the same manner as the non-Christian cultist. Only he or his group are saved, and anyone who disagrees with his unique understanding must be a non-Christian.

Is J.I. Packer a Christian? (Calvinist) Yes.

Is Phillip Yancey (Arminian, possible Open Theist) a Christian? Yes.

Are sozo and godrulz Christian? yes. Then act like it sozo, or change your subtitle from intolerant to plain old ignorant.

I John 1:9 Christians can sin. The Holy Spirit convicts unbelievers and believers of sin. Great Christians (cf. King David) have committed adultery, etc. (that is a sin) and have been restored to intimacy with God through repentance and new obedience (through the person and work of the Spirit). These ideas are self-evident and found in the lives of believers in Scripture.

Where specifically do I believe in another gospel besides the one once for all entrusted to the saints (Jude 4)? I do not see you defending the truth on the Mormon threads.

c.moore
July 4th, 2004, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

I don't reject the Christian scriptures entirely, I merely reject certain interpretations of them. ;)


Then why are you an athiest when you have tasted the goodness of Christ ???

the bible say`s who is not with Him is against Him.

How can you know the truth about the bible or interpretated it correctly when the truth or the Holy Spirit is not in you any more??:confused:

Sozo
July 4th, 2004, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses preach another gospel and believe in a different god and Jesus.

Yes they do, and that is obvious. They are not the wolves in sheep clothing.
The Great Calvinists and Arminians in the Body of Christ through the centuries had the wisdom and grace to recognize each other as fellow believers with differing understanding of some areas of theology. They did not deny the essentials of the gospel, which include the Deity and resurrection of Christ. Satan knows that Jesus rose from the dead, and he knows that Jesus is God. Believeing those do not make you a Christian.

You sure have an obsession with the doctrines of so-called "Geat" mean of God.

Here I'll give you one of my own quotes...

"There are no great men of God; there is only a Great God of men"
I John 1:9 Christians can sin Wrong! That verse is speaking to all men who would claim that thay have no sin. Those who have done so (claimed that they have sin) have been cleansed from all sin, and are the righteousness of God in Christ. Those who abide in Him cannot sin. 1 John 3:6-10


The Holy Spirit convicts unbelievers and believers of sin That is a lie! The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin... because they DO NOT BELIEVE in Him! The Holy Spirit convicts believers of their righteousness in Christ. He renews their minds with the truth of who we are in Christ!

You are a classic case of store bought Christianity.

c.moore
July 4th, 2004, 09:16 AM
godrulz

Quote:Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses preach another gospel and believe in a different god and Jesus.

Quote C.Moore I agree.

I also was taught if you don`t pay tithes even if you are poor and need every penny , this is why people are poor because they don``t tithes and give soi this is a reason for their poverty and depressions.

What do you think somebody??

All Blessing is cancelled out because a thief can`t be blessed after stealing from God personallly

Sozo
July 4th, 2004, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

godrulz

Quote:Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses preach another gospel and believe in a different god and Jesus.

Quote C.Moore I agree.

I also was taught if you don`t pay tithes even if you are poor and need every penny , this is why people are poor because they don``t tithes and give soi this is a reason for their poverty and depressions.

What do you think somebody??

All Blessing is cancelled out because a thief can`t be blessed after stealing from God personallly

c.moore...

The problem, dear c.moore, is that you need to "flee" from the assemblies that you have grown accustom. You are in a cult that has you focusing your attention on what God is going to do for you, how He is going to "bless" you! You have left your first love. The leaders of your assembly are men of a "depraved mind" and "deprived of the truth", whose sole desire is to teach you to obey their doctrines (the doctrines of men) for the purpose of gaining from you, and not God.

Please get your eyes off of yourself and fixed on Jesus! Stop obsessing over money and health, and live a quiet life in ALL "contentment", giving thanks to God in ALL things.

Jesus loves you.

godrulz
July 4th, 2004, 09:51 AM
The verb tenses in I John 1 mean that a believer will not continuously sin and persist in sin as they did as an unbeliever. To say Christians never sin is the old 'entire sanctification' heresy that is out of sync with sound exegesis.

Note that I do not call you a cultist, Christ-hater, demonic, pervert because you lack basic interpretation skills to rightly divide the word on a peripheral issue.


A famous preacher was slandered in the media for supposedly committing adultery with his secretary. He was asked why he did not defend himself since he was innocent. He replied: "no offense, no defense."

I am wasting my time defending myself to sozo (Paul defended himself against slander), so how about we stick to the issues? Jesus is my Judge, not some legalistic Christian Pharisee.

elected4ever
July 4th, 2004, 10:27 AM
godrulz, by your own testimony I have to judge you a sinner and without God. You do not know God. You are of your father the devil. You demonstrate this with ever post. You have not been set a liberty and you do not possess the seed of God so as to be born again. I hope I am wrong about you but it is clear. You do not know the things of God only of the flesh. You are a religionest and hope to entwine the weak and the helpless in your web of deceit. I do not say this to be mean but for your edification. You do not know God!

Sozo
July 4th, 2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

The verb tenses in I John 1 mean that a believer will not continuously sin and persist in sin as they did as an unbeliever. To say Christians never sin is the old 'entire sanctification' heresy that is out of sync with sound exegesis.



Would this be the 'entire sanctification' heresy that you speak of...

"And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God."

"...to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus"

"...to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, in order that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me"

"By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

c.moore
July 4th, 2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

c.moore...

The problem, dear c.moore, is that you need to "flee" from the assemblies that you have grown accustom. You are in a cult that has you focusing your attention on what God is going to do for you, how He is going to "bless" you! You have left your first love. The leaders of your assembly are men of a "depraved mind" and "deprived of the truth", whose sole desire is to teach you to obey their doctrines (the doctrines of men) for the purpose of gaining from you, and not God.

Please get your eyes off of yourself and fixed on Jesus! Stop obsessing over money and health, and live a quiet life in ALL "contentment", giving thanks to God in ALL things.

Jesus loves you.

Not only is this my church but the ministry I support on my broadcast like Joyce Meyer, Creflo dollar, Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, and many more great tv ministry like the God Channel and TBN all say the same thing and teach the same about the tithes.

OMEGA
July 4th, 2004, 11:52 AM
SOZO,

1John3:6 is Correct . If we STAY and Abide in Christ we will not sin

because our minds will be constantly on Jesus. But the Flesh is weak

and we do not STAY of Abide in Christ because as the scripture says

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

James 4:5 Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?

There is a Conflict here. It is a battle for the Mind and Will and action.

It is easy to say that you will not Steal but it is harder to say you
will not LUST after Sex or LIE to get a better Job.

There is a Constant Battle in the Mind to NOT Sin down through
the Christians Life time and as the Scripture says .

------------------------------------
1John1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1 ¶ My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

----------------------
1 John 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

1 John 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
----------------------

James 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
------------------------
James 3:2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.
-------------------------
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.




Proverbs 24:16 For a just man falleth seven times,
and riseth up again:

OMEGA
July 4th, 2004, 12:06 PM
Godrulz ,

If you think that " born" of the Spirit is Metaphorical, you are wrong.

As Jesus says , that which is Born of the Spirit is Spirit and you as a
Spirit Begotten person do not Move like the Wind.

Only Angelic Beings move like that .

You are not a Spirit Being yet . You are a Spiritual Being.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

drbrumley
July 4th, 2004, 12:07 PM
Call it what you will,

sin, mistakes, not so good judgements on our part.

But that fact remains, Sozo and E4E are correct. We no longer are in sin and we dont sin period.

I think this is an issue of semantics. Sozo says we don't sin, and that is correct. GodRulz says we do sin, only because he chooses the word sin and thereby gets it all confused. This is where the problem is.

Just my two cents.

drbrumley
July 4th, 2004, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

Not only is this my church but the ministry I support on my broadcast like Joyce Meyer, Creflo dollar, Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, and many more great tv ministry like the God Channel and TBN all say the same thing and teach the same about the tithes.

Get out while you can C.Moore.

ebenz47037
July 4th, 2004, 12:31 PM
c.moore,

Check your PMs, please!

Sozo
July 4th, 2004, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

I think this is an issue of semantics. Sozo says we don't sin, and that is correct. GodRulz says we do sin, only because he chooses the word sin and thereby gets it all confused. This is where the problem is.

Just my two cents.

Thanks for the input, doc!

I pray that you are correct, however godrulz, & others, have made it clear that Christians can be in sin, and in Jesus at the same time! Or some have even said that a Christian can move in & out of abiding in Christ, which is ludicrious. They are yo-yos!

The testimony of my life is that I am a witness to God's faithfulness, His sufficiency, His ability, and His righteousness. Their testimony is to their own faithfulness, own sufficiency, own abilities, and own righteousness.

godrulz
July 4th, 2004, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by elected4ever

godrulz, by your own testimony I have to judge you a sinner and without God. You do not know God. You are of your father the devil. You demonstrate this with ever post. You have not been set a liberty and you do not possess the seed of God so as to be born again. I hope I am wrong about you but it is clear. You do not know the things of God only of the flesh. You are a religionest and hope to entwine the weak and the helpless in your web of deceit. I do not say this to be mean but for your edification. You do not know God!

Are you and sozo buddies?

What's with people here?:confused:

godrulz
July 4th, 2004, 11:49 PM
Do I understand correctly that sozo and others here are absolutely PERFECT in thought, word, deed, motive, action?

Some accuse Finney of teaching perfectionism, yet you guys are saying more than he would.

It is not necessary for a Christian to sin, but it is possible. What do you say about the men of God who committed adultery, repented, and were restored? The only thing you can say is that they were never believers in the first place and cannot become believers. Or you could say adultery is not a sin, and they are in good standing. Or you could agree with Scripture that we should not sin, BUT if we do, we have an advocate with the Father who can and will forgive in response to humility, confession, repentance, and new obedience.

A theology that does not match reality and the character of God is false.

In my opinion, your judgments and slander are in fact sin, proving you are not sinless.

We will not be perfect until we see Him and are glorified.

Please respond to Omega's verses that show, in context, that believer's can sin and be restored. This should be interesting mental gymnastics and Scripture twisting.

Welcome to the 'call the kettle black' club. Try taking the arrogant, self-righteous beams out of your own eye before going after the toothpicks in everyone else's eyes.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 06:37 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Do I understand correctly that sozo and others here are absolutely PERFECT in thought, word, deed, motive, action?

No, you understand very little, if anything. Perhaps if you would allow the Holy Spirit to guide you into all truth rather than all of your theological idols, you might come to understand.
Some accuse Finney of teaching perfectionism, yet you guys are saying more than he would. Not even close. If you cannot discern between what we are saying, and what Finney teaches, then I suggest that you strip yourself of all the religious baggage that you have acquired, and start afresh.
It is not necessary for a Christian to sin, but it is possible So, you know more than Jesus, Paul, or John, who said that Christians cannot sin?
What do you say about the men of God who committed adultery, repented, and were restored? Which men are those?
Or you could agree with Scripture that we should not sin, BUT if we do, we have an advocate with the Father who can and will forgive in response to humility, confession, repentance, and new obedience. There you go... adding your own theological nonsense to verses again.
A theology that does not match reality and the character of God is false What the heck does that mean? You are rambling about things you know nothing about. :kookoo:
In my opinion, your judgments and slander are in fact sin, proving you are not sinless. We are just trying to talk you out of your inflated ego, and into understanding what you need to know about the message of Christ. We believe that it is more important that you hear the truth, than it is to offend you.
We will not be perfect until we see Him and are glorified. Once again, you reject the clear teaching once delivered to all the saints.
Please respond to Omega's verses that show, in context, that believer's can sin and be restored. This should be interesting mental gymnastics and Scripture twisting. First of all, no one at TOL does more "scripture twisting" than Omega... why don't you ask him on what day the world is going to be destroyed. I'm sure that the two of you will have lots to talk about! :chuckle:
Do you have interpersonal conflict at home or are your wives doormats? I always get into trouble when some pathetic little jerk like yourself insults my family, and yet the moderators on this site do very little to those who provoke it.

This time, I'll ignore your immature stupidity.

BillyBob
July 5th, 2004, 07:00 AM
I'll field this one, Sozo.

Hey moron [Godrulz], if you want to debate theology, or politics, or what color the sky is, feel free to do so. But when you bring a man's wife into the debate, a women who does not post on this board, you are way out of line.

That would be like me asking you, 'When was the last time you has sex with your mother?', or 'Do you have any naked pictures of your wife? No? Want to buy some?'. Or maybe, 'Hey, who was that black guy I saw climbing out of your wife's window last night before you came home?'.

Refrain from such vulgarities or get banned. Consider yourself warned.





[Trust me, Sozo could have hammered you had he chosen to. ]

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by ebenz47037

c.moore,

Check your PMs, please!

Thanks I will.:)

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 07:13 AM
Should I listen to men tell me to get out my church or listen to what God Say as a sheep??

BillyBob
July 5th, 2004, 07:16 AM
You should have listened to your English teacher.

Delmar
July 5th, 2004, 07:23 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

Not only is this my church but the ministry I support on my broadcast like Joyce Meyer, Creflo dollar, Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, and many more great tv ministry like the God Channel and TBN all say the same thing and teach the same about the tithes. You must be a billionare by now.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

Should I listen to men tell me to get out my church or listen to what God Say as a sheep??

If you were listening to God, you would never have listened to Joyce Meyer, Creflo dollar, Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Hinn, TBN, etc. etc.

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by deardelmar

You must be a billionare by now.

No, but I AM ON MY WAY:

MAYBE BECAUSE of the years I did pay tithes.:D

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

If you were listening to God, you would never have listened to Joyce Meyer, Creflo dollar, Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Hinn, TBN, etc. etc.

I did learn to keep what is good and from God , and throw away the rest.;)

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 08:02 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

No, but I AM ON MY WAY:

MAYBE BECAUSE of the years I did pay tithes.:D

It's not funny, c.moore.

Lives of people, from all over the world, have been destroyed as a direct result of your contributions to the people you mentioned.

Think about that! :think:

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 08:36 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BillyBob

I'll field this one, Sozo.

Hey moron [Godrulz], if you want to debate theology, or politics, or what color the sky is, feel free to do so. But when you bring a man's wife into the debate, a women who does not post on this board, you are way out of line.

That would be like me asking you, 'When was the last time you has sex with your mother?', or 'Do you have any naked pictures of your wife? No? Want to buy some?'. Or maybe, 'Hey, who was that black guy I saw climbing out of your wife's window last night before you came home?'.

Refrain from such vulgarities or get banned. Consider yourself warned.



GR: I have edited out my fleshly comment and apologize for offending you, sozo. It was not meant to be a slam on your family. Please forgive me, I was wrong. I made a needless observation that if you treat a stranger who professes Christ with such disdain, it would not surprise me that you are a jerk with your own family also. This is a common pattern with abrasive people. I made the mistake you are making by judging beyond the evidence. I retract my comment.

Sillybob: Why did you not react to the repeated name-calling of sozo? He called me a pervert (this could put me in jail under the criminal code of Canada), Christ-hater, evil doer, demonic, idiot, etc.

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 08:45 AM
Sozo: We are just trying to talk you out of your inflated ego, and into understanding what you need to know about the message of Christ. We believe that it is more important that you hear the truth, than it is to offend you.



GR: You have the same spirit as 1way who thinks name-calling cancels out intelligent debate. Paul and Jesus did not call people repulsive names to convey truth. You are in the flesh and do not reflect the character of Christ. Communicating truth will be received if you deal with facts instead of personal putdowns.

You consider me a reprobate unbeliever. Is this how you try to win the lost? Do you go up to old ladies and call them slanderous names while you say that Jesus loves them?

If I am a believer (obvious to everyone but yourself), then you must speak the truth in love. This is scriptural and good psychology. You have nerve to think that it is spiritual to call people perverts and Christ-haters while being aghast that I thought you are a person of conflict, possibly even in your own home.

Let truth offend me, instead of your juvenile putdowns. If you want respect and the right to be heard, then grow up and quit being so arrogant and abrasive.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 08:48 AM
Originally posted by godrulz



GR: I have edited out my fleshly comment and apologize for offending you, sozo. It was not meant to be a slam on your family. Please forgive me, I was wrong. I made a needless observation that if you treat a stranger who professes Christ with such disdain, it would not surprise me that you are a jerk with your own family also. This is a common pattern with abrasive people.

Some apology :rolleyes:

What an idiot.




Why did you not react to the repeated name-calling of sozo? He called me a pervert (this could put me in jail under the criminal code of Canada) Not a sex-pervert, you bonehead. If you have this kind of trouble with basic terms, than that explains your inability to understand the basics of the gospel.

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 08:54 AM
The standard use of pervert is a sexual pervert. You did not qualify your own meaning of the term.

Try again: Sozo, I was wrong to slander you with my comments about you and your wife. Please forgive me. I was wrong.

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

Should I listen to men tell me to get out my church or listen to what God Say as a sheep??

You are responsible for your own decisions. I would not be listening to people who create confusion and suggest disrespecting pastoral authority. If you leave the church, have the courtesy to talk to the leadership about your concerns. They must give account for their influence in your life. It is more positive to leave with an attempt to work through issues then to just run away with no learning experience.

Listen to the Spirit of God and the Word of God. I would be suspicious of the advice from some of the posters here. They create confusion, make judgments based on inadequate information, misinterpret simple passages to support a preconceived theology, lack credibility and integrity, etc. Pray for wisdom, seek godly counsel, search the Word, trust God.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

The standard use of pervert is a sexual pervert. You did not qualify your own meaning of the term.

"Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me."

"And the burden of the Lord shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the Lord of hosts our God."

"The lips of the righteous bring forth what is acceptable, But the mouth of the wicked, what is perverted."

"And Jesus answered and said, "O unbelieving and perverted generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring him here to Me."





Sozo, I was wrong to slander you with my comments about you and your wife. Please forgive me. I was wrong. Thank you. I would never speak to my wife or kids the way I do to you. They are willing to learn.

Granite
July 5th, 2004, 09:19 AM
Just a thought that may have been covered (I started skimming when I saw this thread had turned into another urinating contest), but how exactly are pastors supposed to eat and churches function short of tithes? Should it be an exact 10% cut and should people feel like it's mandatory? Maybe yes and maybe no...I'm not exactly a supporter of a 10%-sharp amount but a decent church member should feel an obligation to keep the church in operation.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

I'm not exactly a supporter of a 10%-sharp amount but a decent church member should feel an obligation to keep the church in operation. We all agree that if you are going to attend a church, that you should support it with giving. However, there are those who have made tithing a command to the church, when the bible does not.

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

It's not funny, c.moore.

Lives of people, from all over the world, have been destroyed as a direct result of your contributions to the people you mentioned.

Think about that! :think:

Also i know millions who were saved, and set free and healed from those who I have contributions, and alot of people debt free from the tithes and prosperity message that really works.

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

You are responsible for your own decisions. I would not be listening to people who create confusion and suggest disrespecting pastoral authority. If you leave the church, have the courtesy to talk to the leadership about your concerns. They must give account for their influence in your life. It is more positive to leave with an attempt to work through issues then to just run away with no learning experience.

Listen to the Spirit of God and the Word of God. I would be suspicious of the advice from some of the posters here. They create confusion, make judgments based on inadequate information, misinterpret simple passages to support a preconceived theology, lack credibility and integrity, etc. Pray for wisdom, seek godly counsel, search the Word, trust God.

very good point godrulz .:thumb:

If i do leave the church I should leave in peace and let them bless me out of the church is that the case, but to leave with stress strife and unforgiveness is a curse i think.

i did ask myself wahat would christ do in my position.

Do you know what the Holy Spirit said to me about what ChrĂ_st would do??

Bless those who curse you and bless your enemies.

Walk also in the friut of the Spirit .

Ga:5:22: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Ga:5:23: Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Ga:5:24: And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Ga:5:25: If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Ga:5:26: Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

God Bless you

Shalom

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 10:33 AM
Sozo: I agree with your understanding of the verb 'to pervert' as you quoted.

I have a problem with your use of it as a noun or adjective for myself. My daughter was sexually assaulted, so I take offense with the common use of the word applied to myself (though that was not your intent, others might conclude that).

Not EVERYTHING taught by cmoores influences are wrong. I trust he has the discernment to know truth from error. It is possible to have a mix of sound teaching with some wrong ideas. This is serious and dangerous. It does not automatically make one a Christ-hater or unbeliever (except in my case, because you have made things personal).

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

Just a thought that may have been covered (I started skimming when I saw this thread had turned into another urinating contest), but how exactly are pastors supposed to eat and churches function short of tithes? Should it be an exact 10% cut and should people feel like it's mandatory? Maybe yes and maybe no...I'm not exactly a supporter of a 10%-sharp amount but a decent church member should feel an obligation to keep the church in operation.

I think God will support His church and supply all our need according to His Glory either way.

I think God is strong enough to supply His leaders and pastors even if He has to send a dog with a bag in it mouth to the church with a million dollars to pay the pastors and rent.

But Thank God we should be able to give enough to support the church and leaders by our offereings.

God Bless

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

I have a problem with your use of it as a noun or adjective for myself. My daughter was sexually assaulted, so I take offense with the common use of the word (though that was not your intent).

That is terrible. I hope that God has healed her heart, and yours.

drbrumley
July 5th, 2004, 01:21 PM
C. Moore,

Your killing me with legalism.

drbrumley
July 5th, 2004, 01:24 PM
Granite,

The pastors job is not a glory job. He could be flat broke, and you know what, he still loves God and Jesus and still tends to his sheep.

jeremiah
July 5th, 2004, 01:27 PM
To c.moore:

I have read a few pages here and there, but there are too many to read at this point. So if these questions have been asked or suggestions made, please forgive me. This was your Father's money, right. Had he already tithed on it? If so you would be making a double tithe since this money is now rightfully yours and biblically yours, by inheritance. You may be thinking like the IRS thinks, rather than how God thinks.
Since the Lord loves a cheerful giver and there is discord between you and your wife, why not call this $40,000 a "free will offering" to the Father. Let yourself and your wife sit down, pray, and make a list of God's people and organizations that you want to bless for Him. Then let each of you pick one at a time and give equal or appropriate amounts to each. Enjoy the ability to handle and be responsible with what God has given you!:)

drbrumley
July 5th, 2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by jeremiah

To c.moore:

I have read a few pages here and there, but there are too many to read at this point. So if these questions have been asked or suggestions made, please forgive me. This was your Father's money, right. Had he already tithed on it? If so you would be making a double tithe since this money is now rightfully yours and biblically yours, by inheritance. You may be thinking like the IRS thinks, rather than how God thinks.
Since the Lord loves a cheerful giver and there is discord between you and your wife, why not call this $40,000 a "free will offering" to the Father. Let yourself and your wife sit down, pray, and make a list of God'd people and organizations that you want to bless for Him. Then let each of you pick one at a time and give equal or appropriate amounts to each. Enjoy the ability to handle and be responsible with what God has given you!:)

Exactly, :thumb:

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by jeremiah

To c.moore:

Enjoy the ability to handle and be responsible with what God has given you!:)

Except... stop expecting God to bless you because you give!

That is witchcraft!

jeremiah
July 5th, 2004, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

Except... stop expecting God to bless you because you give!

That is witchcraft!


Are you talking to me? I did not say that!
Habakkuk 3:17 and 18 for me, please.

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by jeremiah

Are you talking to me? I did not say that!
Habakkuk 3:17 and 18 for me, please.

I am talking to c.moore, because that will be his response to your well thought out post.

jeremiah
July 5th, 2004, 01:50 PM
OK and thanks!;)

BillyBob
July 5th, 2004, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by godrulz
GR: I have edited out my fleshly comment and apologize for offending you, sozo. It was not meant to be a slam on your family. Please forgive me, I was wrong. I made a needless observation that if you treat a stranger who professes Christ with such disdain, it would not surprise me that you are a jerk with your own family also. This is a common pattern with abrasive people. I made the mistake you are making by judging beyond the evidence. I retract my comment.

Good for you!


Sillybob: Why did you not react to the repeated name-calling of sozo?

Calling another poster rude names is very different than bringing his family into the argument, wouldn't you agree?


He called me a pervert (this could put me in jail under the criminal code of Canada),

This ain't Canada. [Thank God!]


Christ-hater, evil doer, demonic, idiot, etc.

Did he mention your wife?

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by jeremiah

To c.moore:

I have read a few pages here and there, but there are too many to read at this point. So if these questions have been asked or suggestions made, please forgive me. This was your Father's money, right. Had he already tithed on it? If so you would be making a double tithe since this money is now rightfully yours and biblically yours, by inheritance. You may be thinking like the IRS thinks, rather than how God thinks.
Since the Lord loves a cheerful giver and there is discord between you and your wife, why not call this $40,000 a "free will offering" to the Father. Let yourself and your wife sit down, pray, and make a list of God's people and organizations that you want to bless for Him. Then let each of you pick one at a time and give equal or appropriate amounts to each. Enjoy the ability to handle and be responsible with what God has given you!:)

Because the tithes teaching is only to go to the church you are a member of the corn house , and no where else.

Plus this is from my father death will with I recieved or we will recieve over a million dollars.
So my father couldn`t have payed tithes on the money and if he did , that is his own tithes we can`t tithes for someone else juist like we can`t get saved for someone else unless you are a mormon or an catholic parent.


God Bless

c.moore
July 5th, 2004, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

Except... stop expecting God to bless you because you give!

That is witchcraft!

I wish my pastors and bishops and other tv ministry would believe or see it as witchcraft, which they have proved it is a blessing and have shown the doors of heaven open for them and others.

Mal:3:10: Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

this is what my church stand on and build their faith on .

Sozo
July 5th, 2004, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by c.moore

I wish my pastors and bishops and other tv ministry would believe or see it as witchcraft, which they have proved it is a blessing and have shown the doors of heaven open for them and others.

Mal:3:10: Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

this is what my church stand on and build their faith on .

I see... so then your "church" is made up of the sons of Jacob, and you belong to the house of Israel?

Your faith is in the Law, and not in Christ.

"How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another, and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God? "Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope."

elected4ever
July 5th, 2004, 05:20 PM
c.moore


I wish my pastors and bishops and other tv ministry would believe or see it as witchcraft, which they have proved it is a blessing and have shown the doors of heaven open for them and others.

e4e --------Why would you wish these folks see it as witchcraft unless you already know that it is? They have been proven a blessing? What doors of haven have been opened? God now has to be bribed to bless his children? According to you God now plays favorites.

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

That is terrible. I hope that God has healed her heart, and yours.

Thank you. It was a very difficult experience on Mother's day a year ago. It involved a travelling American group. God intervened. She lost her innocence, but not her virginity. She was not raped. We are all doing good and eventually saw policies change in the group and a formal apology through a lawyer from the assailant. We were able to be a witness in the year of dealings we had with the situation. We were able to resolve things out of court to spare her testifying.

godrulz
July 5th, 2004, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by Sozo

Except... stop expecting God to bless you because you give!

That is witchcraft!

We do not give to get. This is a wrong motive. There is a principle of giving in Scripture. Mt. 6 says that we can expect the providential, responsible Creator to meet our needs as we seek Him first. Paul did say the church at Phillipi were blessed for there generous giving to others out of their own lack. There is a blessing (not necessarily financial) in giving to others, including God.

God can bless whether we give or not.

It is more blessed to give than receive.

He who refreshes others will be refreshed himself.

Coould you expand on the witchcraft/occult connection? There may be an element of this in some contexts, but I think giving to get is simply a false teaching in Word-Faith circles that relates to the flesh and wrong motives.

If giving resulted in getting from demonic sources, then I might call it witchcraft. I do not think an occultist would see giving to get as a core belief in their system.

NT reality often builds on OT shadows/types.

Malachi is not a prescription for the Church. This does not mean that there is not an applicable, everlasting PRINCIPLE in the passage for us.

God judges in the OT. God blesses obedience in the OT and curses for disobedience.

Malachi shows the heart of God for His people. This character quality persists in the NT. There can be a godly principle and spirit behind the letter of the law.

Jesus used the OT. I would not be quick to negate legit. principles from the OT that are not rescinded. The essence of some principles in the OT are continued in the NT or expanded on.

The NT does not change the gist of the heart of God in the Malachi passage. cf. judgments in the prophets had a primary meaning for the people or nations in the OT. There are principles that apply to the people of God or the wicked nations through all generations.

The OT shows God's ways with His people. Timothy says all Scripture is profitable for believers/the church. This was a reference to the LXX or OT, the Bible of Jesus and the very early church. The principle now applies to the NT canon.

We must recognize the distinction between the Old Covenant Law and the NT law of grace in our hearts rather than on tablets of stone. They are not contradictory, but progressive evolution.

e.g. murder..>hate; adultery....>lust, etc.

c.moore
July 6th, 2004, 01:13 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

I see... so then your "church" is made up of the sons of Jacob, and you belong to the house of Israel?

Your faith is in the Law, and not in Christ.

"How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another, and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God? "Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope."

But are we really adopted Jews crafted to a Jewish tree??

godrulz
July 6th, 2004, 01:38 AM
You cannot go wrong giving systematically and proportionately to God and His work. He does honor love and obedience and opposes materialism, greed, and selfishness.

Using the tithe as a non-legalistic guideline does not put one under the Law. NT believers can and should exceed the Law out of love and service to Christ.

This debate is becoming a semantical issue. No one is suggesting we put ourself under the Law. Nor are we to break the spirit of the Law. We should not murder, but also not hate. We should not commit adultery, but also not lust. The moral law of God has eternal application. The ceremonial law of Moses has principles of wisdom, but is geared more to ancient Judaism.

c.moore
July 6th, 2004, 03:31 AM
so is tithes just an old testament Issue??

Ro:15:4: For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Le:27:30: And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD's: it is holy unto the LORD.

Le:27:32: And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.

This is what I hear all the time that it is not a law or legalism but it is just Holy unto the Lord.


So the tithes teaches it is also in the new testament:

M't:23:23: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Lu:11:42: But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Heb:5:10: Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

Ge:14:18: And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
Ge:14:19: And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
Ge:14:20: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

people say when we tithes today we are presenting the tithes to Jesus our high priest.

to not to tithes is hindering God`s ability to bless enpower, and to prosper.
Mal 3:8.9.


What do you think about this teaching???

This is notes I have taken from Creflo Dolloar teachings on tithes and prosperity.

jeremiah
July 6th, 2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by c.moore

Because the tithes teaching is only to go to the church you are a member of the corn house , and no where else.

Plus this is from my father death will with I recieved or we will recieve over a million dollars.
So my father couldn`t have payed tithes on the money and if he did , that is his own tithes we can`t tithes for someone else juist like we can`t get saved for someone else unless you are a mormon or an catholic parent.


God Bless

Do you see that if your father tithed on the million, then you inherit that million, you would not need to tithe on it again?
The tithe would then apply to the increase that the million dollars makes for you in profitable investments.
Here is how the IRS thinks. An 80 year old greatgrandfather sells the family business that he founded, for a million dollar profit. He dies. His 60 year old son inherits it, pays 30% to the IRS,etc. He dies as soon as the estate closes. His 40 year old son, pays 30%. He dies as soon as the estate closes. The 21 year old greatgrandson inherits the remainder, pays the 30%, buys an average priced house, and a couple of nice cars, with the remainder of the $343.000. He then puts $50,000 in the bank for a rainy day and works hard the rest of his life.
If you tithe each time, as well then you are left with $226,000. His greatgrandson can not even afford to buy an average house, even in the Denver metroplex.
Since you want to be biblical with the tithe, then you need to be biblical with the rights of inheritance. This million dollars is rightfully and biblically yours. It has not really passed hands in the biblical sense. Only governments see this money as having passed from one hand to the other, and want to make you think that way, so that you will agree to pay taxes on it for the benefit of the government.
Did your father tithe on his million? NO? Then tithe for your father, to the priesthood, at the local church, and say, forgive him Father for he knew not what he was doing? If he did, or if you are not sure, then make it a Biblical free will offering, and give some to the widow down the street or the orphanage across town perhaps.
May God bless you with such wonderful choices to make

Sozo
July 6th, 2004, 08:09 AM
c.moore...

Since you spend quite a bit of time at TOL, then why don't you send ummm... 5%, of the million, to this ministry, and you can send the other 5% to Benny?

Okay?

elected4ever
July 6th, 2004, 09:32 AM
There was a guy a while back that felt that he was obligated to give to the needy every time someone held there hand out and give him a sob story. He was so bad that he would give his employers money away. All you had to do was ask. He used the following scripture to justify his action; 1 John 3:17 Â_But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? No discernment led to theft and the man blamed God because he lost his job. If you tithe at the expense of your family's welfare your make God a partaker of your evil deed and you will blame God for your misery. I have seen it a thousand times and these preachers that preach giving to get teach just that. They dupe the desperate out of there money and then say that you didn't have enough faith. These people are prophets of hell and not heaven.
:mad:

godrulz
July 6th, 2004, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by elected4ever

There was a guy a while back that felt that he was obligated to give to the needy every time someone held there hand out and give him a sob story. He was so bad that he would give his employers money away. All you had to do was ask. He used the following scripture to justify his action; 1 John 3:17 �_But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? No discernment led to theft and the man blamed God because he lost his job. If you tithe at the expense of your family's welfare your make God a partaker of your evil deed and you will blame God for your misery. I have seen it a thousand times and these preachers that preach giving to get teach just that. They dupe the desperate out of there money and then say that you didn't have enough faith. These people are prophets of hell and not heaven.
:mad:

Giving $40,000/$1 million as cmoore is considering will not leave his family destitute.

Sozo, bad idea to give 5% to TOL and 5% to Hinn...I agree! May I commend www.gfa.org as a worthy cause?

c.moore
July 7th, 2004, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Sozo

c.moore...

Since you spend quite a bit of time at TOL, then why don't you send ummm... 5%, of the million, to this ministry, and you can send the other 5% to Benny?

Okay?

But mI have grown more form the Benny Hinn ministry and sence I support Benny Hinn , that would be a very good Idea.:thumb:

c.moore
July 7th, 2004, 11:21 AM
jeremiah

But everyone should tithes for themselves and my father and no one else can tites for me or others just like we can`t saved for someone else, we are accountable for our own lives and we are also personally judge according to each our own works.

c.moore
July 7th, 2004, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by godrulz

Giving $40,000/$1 million as cmoore is considering will not leave his family destitute.

Sozo, bad idea to give 5% to TOL and 5% to Hinn...I agree! May I commend www.gfa.org as a worthy cause?

Hey that a nice video about the need in Asia.AMEN!

godrulz
July 7th, 2004, 12:30 PM
This ministry has integrity, accountability, and effectiveness. 100% of your $30/month or more goes to the mission field. This has been my best eternal investment over the last 20 years.

The free book, Revolution in World Missions, is challenging.

The video is anointed, is it not? This is the Father-heart of the Lord of the harvest. A creative, new stragegy shift has occurred away from colonial missions.

Rather than quibbling about tithing, let us get on with the work of the Kingdom.

c.moore
July 7th, 2004, 02:07 PM
godrulz

But giving to that ministry is not tithing it is giving, and as far as the titheing teaching my giving can`t even be bless because the tithes has been stolen from my church or my corn house.

drbrumley
July 7th, 2004, 02:18 PM
C. Moore,

I noticed your post on "Heretics message to be saved" thread, and let me just say, these two topics that we are both a part of, comes down to the same thing. Do we follow the law? Tithing is out of the question Mr. Moore. Just like getting water baptized is out of the question. If you want to, feel free. But it's not a requirement for anything. So yes, your contribution to a church or Godly organization is a gift. It's not a requirement. AS I asked Rene, Do we still sacrifice sheep and goats?

billwald
July 7th, 2004, 02:20 PM
You all who object to tithing support the idea of giving 10% of income?

godrulz
July 7th, 2004, 02:25 PM
Corn house?

I think you have to decide whether your concept of tithing based on OT principles (not law or legalisms) is correct. Some of your questions seem to reflect legalism (or a sincere desire to obey God's Word and leaders), rather than heart motives and love. I would support either position. As I said, tithing on an inheritance is controversial since it is not earned income (fruit of your labor). A middle position would be to give some to your church and some to other ministries. You decide, you live with it.

drbrumley
July 7th, 2004, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by billwald

You all who object to tithing support the idea of giving 10% of income?

It can be how ever much I decide to give. If God puts it in my heart to fund an entire ministry, I would. If that means 50% then so be it.

It's a gift. Not a tithe. If you want to tithe, live in Isreal.

godrulz
July 7th, 2004, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

C. Moore,

I noticed your post on "Heretics message to be saved" thread, and let me just say, these two topics that we are both a part of, comes down to the same thing. Do we follow the law? Tithing is out of the question Mr. Moore. Just like getting water baptized is out of the question. If you want to, feel free. But it's not a requirement for anything. So yes, your contribution to a church or Godly organization is a gift. It's not a requirement. AS I asked Rene, Do we still sacrifice sheep and goats?

Old Testament Jewish baptisms are out. NT believer's baptism is legit. (unless you follow Enyart's dispensations).

drbrumley
July 7th, 2004, 02:28 PM
Enyart's dispensations? ROFL!!!!!

Since when is it his dispensations?

godrulz
July 7th, 2004, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Enyart's dispensations? ROFL!!!!!

Since when is it his dispensations?

Observation: There are a variety of types of dispensationalism. Many dispensationalists (I am a type) support believer's baptism and tithing. Enyart has a minority, unique view.

drbrumley
July 7th, 2004, 02:32 PM
GodRulz says:

Enyart has a minority, unique view.

Maybe more biblical then you would like to admit?

godrulz
July 7th, 2004, 02:34 PM
I have not finished reading "The Plot". So far, some of his support is based on ?NKJV only and verses out of context.

drbrumley
July 7th, 2004, 02:36 PM
If you say so.

Crow
July 7th, 2004, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by godrulz

Old Testament Jewish baptisms are out. NT believer's baptism is legit. (unless you follow Enyart's dispensations).

My neighbor is a Baptist who has never read anything of Enyart's. She recognizes baptism and tithing as being of the Law. She says that when people are baptized that it is a purely symbolic gesture, and in no way necessary to salvation.